The Rifle Club Movement and Australian Defence
1860-1941
Andrew Kilsby
A thesis in fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
University of New South Wales
School of Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences
Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences
February 2014
Abstract
This thesis examines the rifle club movement and its relationship with Australian defence to 1941. It looks at the origins and evolution of the rifle clubs and associations within the context of defence developments. It analyses their leadership, structure, levels of Government and Defence support, motivations and activities, focusing on the peak bodies. The primary question addressed is: why the rifle club movement, despite its strong association with military rifle shooting, failed to realise its potential as an active military reserve, leading it to be by-passed by the military as an effective force in two world wars?
In the 19th century, what became known as the rifle club movement evolved alongside defence developments in the Australian colonies. Rifle associations were formed to support the Volunteers and later Militia forces, with the first ‘national’ rifle association formed in 1888. Defence authorities came to see rifle clubs, especially the popular civilian rifle clubs, as a cheap defence asset, and demanded more control in return for ammunition grants, free rail travel and use of rifle ranges. At the same time, civilian rifle clubs grew in influence within their associations and their members resisted military control. An essential contradiction developed. The military wanted rifle clubs to conduct shooting ‘under service conditions’, which included drill; the rifle clubs preferred their traditional target shooting for money prizes. The ageing leadership of the rifle associations, although pro-military in sentiment, failed to integrate the rifle clubs into the military structure and was unable to appease either the military or the clubs.
The end result was a disconnect between the needs and aims of the military and rifle club movement, and a growing mutual disdain. The outcome, when war came in 1914 and again in 1939, was that the military ignored the movement and developed new structures to meet the wartime challenges. This thesis argues that this outcome was inevitable given the failure of the rifle club movement either to break away from its military roots, or adapt to evolving military requirements in accordance with its traditional aims. Table of Contents Page
Introduction 1-18
Chapter 1. Rifle shooting and the Volunteers to 1870 1-28
Chapter 2. Sowing the seeds of contradiction 1871-1887 1-33
Chapter 3. Progress and pain 1888-1896 1-32
Chapter 4. War at home and on the veldt 1897-1900 1-23
Chapter 5. The general sets his sights 1901-1904 1-18
Chapter 6. The seeds of discord 1905-1910 1-24
Chapter 7. To shoot or drill 1911-1918 1-20
Chapter 8. Two steps back, one step forward 1919-1928 1-26
Chapter 9. The Depression years 1929-1934 1-17
Chapter 10. Sidelined again 1935-1941 1-22
Conclusion, Annexes 1-24
Introduction
Firearms were an integral part of Australian colonial and early Federation culture. Whether for military purposes, represented by British Imperial garrison regiments and, after 1870, by local Volunteers and then Militia, or for policing, for self-defence or game and bird sport, a great number of the adult population (and many juveniles) owned a firearm or knew someone who did. In the 19th and early 20th centuries, rifle shooting as sport was an ‘every man’s’ pastime, which most people could afford to enjoy. In many regards, however, rifle shooting became more than a sport. There was one major reason for this development and one major consequence. War scares in the 19th century, of which there were many, drove the development of a popular Volunteer military movement where musketry was a primary focus. This led to the development of rifle associations from 1860, created to promote rifle shooting among Volunteers. Rifle shooting for defence purposes evolved, albeit somewhat differently in each colony, into a powerful and militarised rifle club movement by the time of Federation, accelerated by patriotic feelings during the Boer War.1 What became known as the ‘rifle club movement’ by the time of Federation in 1901 had already been a long time in gestation.2
By 1911, rifle club members were a well-entrenched component of the defence system as ‘reservists’. By 1917, more than 100,000 Australians belonged to rifle clubs and another 25,000 more had enlisted in the Australian Imperial Force (AIF). Yet by 1920 the rifle club movement faced disbandment when the military chiefs rejected it as adding no military value. Despite the fact of its powerful backers at almost all levels of society, and its presence in almost every town and city in
1 By 1901, at the height of the Boer War, Victoria alone had over 20,000 riflemen under arms. J.M. Templeton, The Consolidation of the British Empire, the Growth of Citizen Soldiership and the Establishment of the Australian Commonwealth, Sands & McDougall, Melbourne, 1901, p. 53. Colonel Templeton, at this time in command of rifle clubs in Victoria, had more men under his command than the State Commandant. 2 The term was coined by Colonel Templeton around 1901 with the unprecedented success of the rifle clubs in Victoria in forming, in effect, a ‘third force’ in military affairs. In two seminal lectures delivered by leaders of the rifle club movement in 1901 and 1909 respectively, the ‘Movement’ was described as an indispensable part of the Defence establishment and as an undeniable part of Australia’s cultural heritage. J.M. Templeton, The Consolidation of the British Empire, and Campbell, J. B., The Rifle Club Movement: A Distinct Factor in the Defence Problem, Fraser & Jenkinson, Melbourne, 1909.
6
Australia, the rifle club movement failed to capitalise on its apparently natural attributes—and popularity—and faced extinction, at least as a formal part of the defence organisation.
Excluded from the military establishment when it was moved administratively under the Minister for Defence, and then hit again by the effects of the Great Depression, the leadership of the rifle club movement worked assiduously to be placed under the Army once again. The movement, by and large, believed that its natural and rightful place was as part of the military reserves of Australia. In 1931 it succeeded, only to find that the gulf between the rifle shooting requirements of the Militia and that of rifle clubs had diverged for too long ever to be fully compatible again. By 1941, with the need to form a new home defence guard for Australia, politicians and the Defence establishment chose not to depend on the rifle club movement as its basis. Again, through World War Two, the rifle club movement was sidelined, as it had been in World War One.
Despite the numbers of Australians engaged in defence-related rifle shooting from 1860 to 1941, and its obvious historical significance, the rifle club movement has been largely neglected by historians. The historiography of the movement is thin. Despite its well-established place in the popular culture and defence structure of Australia in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, virtually nothing has been written about the rifle club movement, let alone about its complex relationship with defence.3 Short and inadequate histories of only two rifle associations have been written, and these reveal little about the relationship with defence and the frictions which often arose.4 Such individual club histories which do exist are often sparse in detail, relying heavily on rare records and fading memories. Most early rifle club and rifle association records have been neglected, lost or
3 Despite the prominent individuals associated with the rifle shooting movement - about 42 in the Australian Dictionary of Biography alone up to 1920 - no detailed memoirs were left by its leaders. 4 C.H. Cromack, The History of the National Rifle Association of New South Wales,1860-1956, Utility Press, Sydney, 1956 and A.T. Jackson, Southern Queensland Rifle Association Jubilee, 1877-1927: a brief History of the Association during the past Fifty Years, Southern Queensland Rifle Association, Brisbane, 1927. Cromack’s history, the more substantial of the two, relied heavily on the National Rifle Association (NRA) of NSW’s council meeting minutes and notes from a long-standing secretary of the Association, George Douglas. Jackson’s history is designed as a souvenir book rather than a detailed account - it completely missed, for example, the formation of the first Queensland Rifle Association in 1861. Courier, 16 May 1861, p. 2. 7
destroyed—some casually, some in accidents.5 Even the annual reports of the rifle associations, with the exception of those in New South Wales (NSW), are rare.6
Books written by individual riflemen of the period tend to focus either on the art and science of rifle shooting itself or the social aspects of the sport, and offer few insights into the politics or policies affecting rifle shooting. In the pre-Federation period, no club or association histories were written at all, and only two travel accounts exist of rifle teams from Australia competing abroad.7 Similarly, there has not been a history of rifle shooting in Australia written for the past 50 years, with the exception of technical compendiums.8 For their part, Parliamentary records are usually brief, at least until a Government-appointed Director of Rifle Associations and Clubs began to make reports to Parliament from 1913, but even these kept mainly to statistical reporting. Defence records, with the exception of Victoria where a Defence Department and Minister existed from the mid-1880s, generally do not report in detail about the rifle club movement until after Federation. Until the late
5 For example, T.J. Noonan, Queensland Police Rifle Club 1883-2000, Murrumba Downs, T.J. Noonan, 2004; and B.H. Rogers, Reedbeds Rifle Club (Adelaide, SA), The Club, Adelaide, 1999; C. Roberts, (ed.), From Cascade to Wentworth Creek: a history of the Katoomba Rifle Club 1893-1988, Katoomba Rifle Club Committee, Lawson, c1988 and D. Rapley, Rifle Clubs of the Yarra Valley - a Historical Perspective from 1885-2000, D. Rapley, Warragul, 2004. A typical story of record destruction was the fire which destroyed the Yarrawonga Rifle Club’s records in 1927 and with it 53 years of history. I. Sloane, ‘The Yarrawonga Rifle Club’, Australian Target Rifle, Issue No.1, January/February 1996, p. 19. 6 The National Rifle Association [NRA] of NSW has always been the ‘richest’ of the colonial and State associations, and the surviving records reflect its capacity to print its annual reports from 1861. Colonial and then State rifle association annual reports were rarely produced, and with the exception of those of the NRA of NSW, only about 20 percent of those that were survive today. 7 Examples of technical books include: P.I. Carter, Notes on Rifle Shooting, R. Forrest, The Advertiser Office, Adelaide, 1882; C.H. Des Voeux, Hints for Rifle Clubs, James C. Beal, Govt. Printer, Brisbane, 1890, Anon., The Australasian Rifle Register and Notes on Rifle Shooting, Sands & McDougall Ltd., Melbourne, c.1898; P. Fargher, Hints on Rifle Shooting (2nd ed.), Sands & McDougall Ltd., Melbourne, c.1898 and M.G. Hipwell, Notes on Rifle Shooting, Whillas & Ormiston, Adelaide, 1899. Travelogues include A. Blannin, Hasty notes of a flying trip with the Victorian Rifle Team to England and America in 1876, A. Blannin, Melbourne, 1877 and twenty years later, A. Blannin, To Bisley and back with the Kolapore Cup, Advance Australia, Melbourne, 1898. 8 J.E. Corcoran, The Target Rifle in Australia, 1860-1900, Dolphin Press, Hunters Hill, 1975. Written for the antique rifle collectors’ audience, the book does reveal some of the history behind the rifles described and provides glimpses into the thinking of some of the leaders of the movement and hints at what might be found in primary source material held in archives and public libraries. For example, it provides an important and invaluable appendix - a copy of the proceedings of the first annual meeting of the General Council of the Rifle Associations in 1889 (following its formation the previous year). This single document provides a number of leads into an understanding of how the military establishments influenced the Rifle Club Movement - and vice versa - see Corcoran pp. 199-216. 8
1890s, when colonial military commandants began to see rifle clubs as a cheap defence asset, the colonial commandants rarely discussed rifle shooting in detail in their annual reports unless it impacted directly on the military structure or forces of the time, such as the bare statistics of musketry courses and numbers enrolled.9
There has been much written about the Volunteer movement in Australia, less about the militia period from 1884 and then a great deal about the AIF. In all cases the rifle clubs and rifle shooting receive some attention in passing, but not in any systematic way. Studies of Volunteers and early militia in Australia abound.10 Four academic studies on the subject of the Volunteers stand out, and all of these studies to a greater (Wilkins’ and Marmion’s) or lesser degree (Zwillenberg’s) explore the social makeup and ‘society’ of the Volunteers and by extension, the riflemen.11 The appearance of notable Volunteer units (such as the Victorian Mounted Rifles in 1885 and the Victorian Rangers in 1888), have been noted but their roots in country and metropolitan rifle clubs have not been
9 Examples include Report of the Council of Defence [Victoria], John Ferres, Govt. Printer, Melbourne, 1885 -1886, ‘Report of Major-General Edwards, C.B., upon the local forces and defences of Queensland, with scheme for the organization of the military forces of the Australian colonies’, Queensland Parliament Report CA 99-1889, 9th October 1889, James C. Beal, Govt. Printer, Brisbane, 1889, ‘Report by Commandant on Local Forces’, South Australia House of Assembly Report No.95, 19th August 1886, ‘Tasmanian Defence Force - Report by Commandant’, Report No.64, Tasmanian Parliament, 14th June 1893, ‘Report of the Inspecting Field Officer of the Volunteer Force of Western Australia 1883- 84’, Votes and Proceeding of the Legislative Council during the session of 1884, Richard Pether, Govt. Printer, Perth, 1884. 10 Examples include D.M. Wyatt, With the Volunteers: A Historical Diary of the Volunteer Military Forces of the North-West and West Coasts of Tasmania 1886-1986, D. M. Wyatt, Tasmania, 1987 and D.M. Wyatt, A Lion in the Colony: An Historical Outline of the Tasmanian Colonial Volunteer Forces 1859-1901, 6th Military District Museum, Anglesea Barracks, Hobart, 1990; B. Nichols, The Colonial Volunteers: The Defence Forces of the Australian Colonies 1836-1901, Allen & Unwin, Sydney, 1988; G. Walsh, ‘The Military and the Development of the Australian Colonies 1788-1888’, in M. McKernan, & M. Browne, (ed.), Australia: Two Centuries of War and Peace, Allen & Unwin, Sydney, 1988; and D.H. Johnson, Volunteers at Heart: The Queensland Defence Forces, 1860-1901, University of Queensland Press, St. Lucia, 1975; G. Ginn, H. Davies, B. Rough, (ed.), A Most Promising Corps: Citizen Soldiers in Colonial Queensland 1860-1903, Colonial Forces Study Group, (Qld), Brisbane, 2010. 11 H.J. Zwillenberg, ‘The Military in South Australia 1836-1854’, BA Honours Thesis, University of Adelaide, 1964 and H.J. Zwillenberg, ‘Citizens and Soldiers: The Defence of South Australia 1836-1901’, MA Thesis, University of Adelaide, 1969; L. Wilkins, ‘The Bated Shining Sword: The Colonial Defence Force as a Mirror of Colonial Society in South Australia 1836-1901’, Honours Thesis, University of Adelaide, 1983 and B. Marmion, ‘The Victorian Volunteer Force on the central Victorian Goldfields 1858-1883’, MA Thesis, La Trobe University, 2003. 9
explored by historians. 12 While historians recognized that rifle shooting could not be ignored, they were not always sure why (with the possible exception of Craig Wilcox in his book For Hearths and Homes, although then only through the focus of the development of the AIF).13
The most comprehensive sources of information on the rifle club movement for 1860-1941 are the newspapers of the time, which reported widely and in detail on this most popular and patriotic pastime. Rifle association meeting minutes were often reported word for word.14 Detailed results of rifle shooting matches were in every newspaper; letters to the editor on the subject were common; champion rifle shots were lionized as prominent celebrities. However, methodical research across newspaper reports has not been undertaken before. One aim of this thesis, therefore, is to help to fill in this shortfall.
A consequence of the thin historiography overall is that important historical questions remain unanswered. What was the significance of the rifle club movement to defence, for example, and what factors and forces shaped the movement? What was the relationship between the movement, defence and government? From 1860, colonial rifle associations brought together Volunteers, and later, militia and rifle club members under the umbrella of target rifle shooting. The creation, in 1888, of a national rifle association (called the General Council, which was dominated by Volunteer and militia officers) also created Australia’s oldest national sporting organisation. Raised primarily to support rifle shooting among Volunteers, each colonial rifle association followed somewhat different paths in terms of organization and ‘culture’. The most marked difference was the degree to which each was dominated or not by the military establishment in each of their colonies. Why were there differences between the colonies in this respect and what factors were common between them?
12 T.B. Millar, ‘The History of the Defence Forces of the Port Phillip District and the Colony of Victoria 1836-1900’, MA Thesis, University of Melbourne, 1957, p. 159 and p. 169; R.K. Peacock, ‘The Victorian Rangers’, The Victorian Historical Magazine, Vol. XVII, No.1, May 1938, pp. 1-18. 13 C. Wilcox, For Hearths and Homes: Citizen Soldiering in Australia 1854-1945, Allen & Unwin, Sydney, 1998. 14 This was especially true in the case of the Mercury newspaper in Tasmania in the late 19th Century, as the owning family was also intimately involved with rifle shooting.
10
The importance of the rifle shooting movement to the social and sporting history of colonial and newly Federated Australia is beyond the scope of this thesis, but remains an important question for future research.
By the 1890s, colonial defence officials—in particular the British Army’s seconded staff officers and commandants—wanted to control rifle clubs as potential defence assets. The ‘rifle club movement’, while supportive of defence objectives and therefore of the progress towards Federation, also valued its independence, especially as civilian rifle clubs grew in number. In 1892, an attempt to form a Military Rifle League in NSW at the apparent instigation of Major-General Edward Thomas Henry Hutton, the then NSW Commandant, created friction with the colonial rifle associations. A more forceful and controversial decision by Hutton’s successor in NSW, Major-General George Arthur French, to form a breakaway Defence Forces Rifle Association in 1899 while he was also president of the NRA of NSW created real conflict between the military and the colonial association there.15 Similarly, the formation of the Volunteer Defence Corps in 1941 and the sidelining of the rifle club movement for home defence was another example of friction between military and rifle club movement.
Issues of control, government subsidies and the type of shooting being practised also fuelled a burgeoning dispute between the civilian and military rifle shooting proponents, even as the rifle club movement became more regularized and fell deeper under military control after 1904. These issues became critical as Australia’s new Federal army took shape and universal military training was introduced in 1911. Indeed, Hutton and French’s experiences in NSW with its rifle association were at least partly responsible for Hutton’s aggressive and controlling attitude to the rifle club movement when he returned to Australia as its first Commander-in-Chief in late 1901. Hutton was widely regarded as supportive of rifle shooting, but only on his terms. The relationship between the
15 C.H. Cromack, The History of the National Rifle Association of NSW 1860 to 1956, pp. 32-33 and the Sydney Morning Herald, 8 March 1899, p. 5. French was also president of the NRA of NSW at the time. 11
rifle club movement and its defence and political masters in this period is an as yet unexplained aspect of Australian military history.
The involvement and activities of the ‘rifle club movement’ during the Boer War has several strands to it. These include the public debate between influential riflemen and the colonial defence department in Victoria, for example, as to which sort of rifle should equip the Colony’s defence forces as they anticipated possible deployment to South Africa. 16 Another is the role played by prominent rifle association council members who became contingent commanders or otherwise served in that conflict. The Boer War also energized contradictory views about the effectiveness of target shooting versus military shooting. In turn this added to the tension and acrimony between rifle club advocates and Hutton between 1902 and 1904.
The physical contribution of the rifle club movement to the Boer War contingents is not covered in detail in this thesis as the historical record is virtually non-existent. Before Federation attestation forms by individual rifle club men, where they do survive, rarely show that the individual stated that he had rifle club service.17 Even after Federation, when attestation forms are more readily available, again few men stated if they had been members of rifle clubs.18 We are left with ‘educated guesses’ as to the number of rifle club men who joined up for the Boer War. More substance is known about the rapid growth of rifle clubs in Australia during the Boer War – and later, in World War One.
With the end of the Boer War and the coming of Federation, the influence of the ‘old guard’ proponents of the ‘rifle club movement’ appeared to be weakening.19 However, rifle club leaders
16 A.J. Kilsby, The Bisley Boys, A. Kilsby, Melbourne 2008, pp. 98-99. 17 For example, in the comprehensive biographical notes of hundreds of men who served with the 3rd and 4th Victorian contingents to the Boer War, accompanying Robin Droogleever’s That Ragged Mob, Trojan Press, Thomastown, 2009, pp. 434-696, a reader is hard pressed to find any of them with a rifle club against their name. 18 For example, of 65 attestation forms post-Federation shown under the common name of Smith, none list a rifle club under the previous military service section of the form. http://recordsearch.naa.gov.au/NameSearch/Interface/ItemsListing.aspx 19 Wilcox, ‘Australia’s Citizen Army 1889-1914’, Ch.5, pp. 5-6 and Commonwealth Military Forces: Regulations for Rifle Clubs, Department of Defence, Melbourne, 1903 and 1904. 12
were prominent in the formation of the National Defence League (NDL) from 1905; the secretaries of two State rifle associations were also secretaries of their State NDL branches.20 By 1908 over 50,000 men were members of rifle clubs across Australia, with more than 21,000 in Victoria alone.21 The potential influence and reach of the rifle club men in electoral districts gave the movement considerable political support; on at least one occasion in Western Australia some rifle clubs actively campaigned against a non-supportive defence minister.22 What then might be said of the political clout of the movement over time?
After Federation, records of the interaction between defence and rifle clubs began to be kept in a more thorough manner. Rifle Club Regulations were set, statistical yearbooks began to include rifle club numbers, obligations as reservists were taken more seriously and clubs were given mobilization instructions. From 1914, a Director of Rifle Associations and Rifle Clubs made annual reports to Parliament; the first report included the memorable statement: ‘It seems a hard thing to say, but it would seem that the Rifle Clubs are composed of men who can shoot but can’t drill, while the Citizen Forces can drill but can’t shoot; if they can, they are very modest about it.’23 What does such a statement say about the role and contribution of the movement? To what degree does the rifle club movement complement the Australian Military Forces on the eve of World War One, and later, World War Two?
World War One changed everything. Rifle club membership become more popular than ever but rifle clubs saw no active service in defence of Australia.24 The rifle clubs did contribute what amounted to a division’s worth (about 25,000) of trained riflemen to the AIF; in NSW alone 6,486
20 Lieutenant Herbert Dakin in NSW and Philip Fargher in Victoria. The first secretary of the NDL in NSW was Lieutenant-Colonel Gerald Ross Campbell, also a vice-president of the NRA of NSW. 21 Official Year Book of the Commonwealth of Australia, 1301.1, Section 28, 1909, Govt. Printer, Melbourne, 1909. 22 ‘Rifle Clubs Vigilance Committee of W.A. Circular dated 10 May 1913’, State Records Office of Western Australia, Item 2616A/7b. 23 ‘Report on the State Rifle Associations, District Rifle Club Unions, and Rifle Clubs for the year ended 30 June 1914’, Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia, 2 December 1914, Albert J. Mullett, Govt. Printer, Melbourne, 1914, p. 7. 24 Wilcox, ‘Australia’s Citizen Army 1889-1914’. 13
members had enlisted up until the end of 1916.25 While some rifle club men helped train soldiers in musketry before embarkation and others were employed as snipers at the front, there were no fully formed rifle club units.26 After World War One Australia dismantled its Imperial Force and reduced its full-time forces to a rump once again, with militia units carrying on the Anzac traditions. The key question here of course, was how much did the movement contribute to the AIF and, why has it continued to be left out of the narrative of the AIF? Similarly, with the outbreak of World War Two in 1939, how did the rifle club movement again fail to capitalise on its position as a large component of defence reserves, to shape and dominate the home defence forces, the Volunteer Defence Corps (VDC)? The formation of the VDC, like the AIF in both World War One and World War Two, sidelined the rifle club movement from active involvement as an organisation.
In 1920 a military committee assembled to review Australia’s future military needs. In a direct assault on the status and influence of the ‘rifle club movement’, it questioned the efficacy of the rifle clubs and their contribution during World war One. Rifle clubs, even though there were still 81,000 men enrolled in 1919, were subsequently sidelined to Defence civilian, not Army, control, and only narrowly survived total disbandment after appeals were made to friendly politicians by rifle club leaders. 27 The movement, as it had been from 1860, came to an end—but why now and what had changed? In 1941, the rifle club movement was placed in recess and all of its rifles sequestered by the Government. How did the rifle club movement fail to convince Government and Defence of its primacy as an active defence reserve? Another aim of this thesis is to address and answer these various questions.
25 Cromack, The History of the National Rifle Association of NSW 1860 to 1956, p. 52; J. Meredith, The Coo-ee March, Gilgandra-Sydney 1915, Macquarie Publications, Dubbo (NSW), 1981 and L.L. Robson, The First A.I.F.: a Study of its Recruitment 1914-1918, Melbourne University Press, Carlton, 1970. 26 J. Meredith, The Coo-ee March, Gilgandra-Sydney 1915, Macquarie Publications, Dubbo, 1981. 27 ‘Report on the Military Defence of Australia by a Conference of Senior Officers of the Australian Military Forces, 6th February 1920’, Vols.1-2, Commonwealth of Australia - Department of Defence, Albert J. Mullett, Govt. Printer, Melbourne, 1920, AWM Series 1 (20/7). The Committee comprised three regular and three militia senior generals (Legge, White, Chauvel, Monash, MacCay and Hobbs). 14
In order to achieve its aims the thesis is arranged into 10 chronological chapters. The first (Rifle Shooting and the Volunteer Movement to 1870) will examine the origins of structured rifle shooting in Australia, the formation and impact of the Volunteer movement on rifle shooting, the formation of the colonial rifle associations, and the beginnings of civilian rifle clubs, ending with the withdrawal of the British Imperial garrison forces from the Australian colonies.
Chapter Two (Sowing the Seeds of Contradiction 1871-1888) will discuss the evolution of the colonial rifle associations in each colony and how they developed different approaches to their relationship with the local military forces. The chapter will look at the impact of formal defence reviews and the establishment of partially paid militias and the concomitant decline of Volunteer forces. In addition, the growth of civilian rifle clubs and their attitudes towards defence obligations and the continuing dominance of Volunteer officers on colonial associations will be reviewed.
Chapter Three (Progress and Pain 1889-1896) will look closely at the militia period and the formation of a ‘national’ rifle association within the context of the growing sentiment in favour of Federation, military views on rifle shooting and other developments affecting relations between the rifle shooting movement and defence in each of the colonies. The chapter will also see examination of the role of the movement as a precursor towards Federation, given impetus by its intercolonial and international activities.
Chapter Four (War at Home and on the Veldt 1897-1900) will examine the growing tension between the military forces in Australia and the rifle club movement, tensions exacerbated by the Boer War. The chapter will examine in particular the developments in NSW, and the roles of Hutton and French as Commandants with responsibility for rifle shooting. In addition the chapter will analyse the trend towards militarisation of the rifle clubs as seen in the Australian Military Rifle League proposal and the Defence Force Rifle Association (NSW) and rifle club auxiliaries (Tasmania, South Australia). The Boer War period will also be examined for its impact on the
15
military vs. rifle club debate, technology shift in service rifles, and consider the rifle association leaders as military leaders.
Chapter Five (The General Sets his Sights 1901-1904) will examine in depth the role of Australia’s first General Officer Commanding, Major-General Hutton, and his impact upon the rifle club movement as he established a new Australian Army and defence framework. The chapter will examine Hutton’s attempts to force the rifle club movement to conform to his new force structure, the impact of the Defence Act of 1904 upon the movement as formal defence ‘reserves’ and the reaction from the rifle club movement.
Chapter Six (The Seeds of Discord 1905-1910) looks at the aftermath of Hutton’s tenure, the introduction of Rifle Club Regulations 1904, the growth of the National Defence League, international visitors (Japanese, British, Americans) and rifle club and military attitudes, and influence on the Military Board. The chapter also examines the marksman vs. service shooting debate and the growing influence of the militia as well as the evolution of defence plans and links.
Chapter Seven (To Shoot or Drill 1911-1918) will explore universal military training, preparing for war, defence plans and riflemen, returns on investment, military attitudes to rifle shooting and rifle association responses. In an examination of the World War One period, the chapter will look at the resistance and failure of rifle clubs to integrate with the military before the outbreak of war, the value and contribution of the rifle clubs to the war effort at home and abroad, including the use of sports battalions, training and snipers, and rifle club leadership.
Chapter Eight (Two Steps Back, One Step Forward 1919-1928) will examine the ‘peace dividend’, the critical breakdown of the relationship between rifle club movement and Defence arising from the deliberations of the Military Committee of 1920 and the new quasi-civilian control of the movement in a period of a stagnating economy and antipathy to war. This chapter will examine how the rifle
16
club movement struggled to re-validate itself with the military, while the military essentially retained control of the movement while keeping it at arm’s length.
Chapter Nine (The Depression Years 1929-1934) will explore the impact of the Great Depression on the rifle club movement and its role as a catalyst to bring the rifle club movement back under direct command of the Army once more. The chapter will note how doing so, ostensibly on economic grounds, did not, nonetheless, solve any of the fundamental issues which still existed between the two organisations.
Chapter Ten (Sidelined, Again 1935-1941) will analyse what happened to the rifle club movement in the lead-up to and during the first years of World War Two. The chapter will examine the various factors at play when critical decisions had to be made by Government both to form expeditionary forces and forces for home defence, and examines why, when Australia seemed to be under potential threat of invasion, the rifle club movement signally failed to resist being closed down for the duration.
This thesis has looked carefully at archival source material but archival sources on rifle shooting are thin before Federation. Even after 1901, archives focus mostly on rifle ranges and some club matters; the bulk of the policy files and reports hold glimpses into the broader subject but rarely anything substantial other than Commandant reports and statistics.28 After a Director for Rifle Associations and Clubs was appointed in 1913, annual yearly returns provide a detailed look at the state of the rifle club reserves.29 Certain archival series in the post-World War One period and before 1941 offer insights into the relationships between associations and clubs with militia units and
28 After Federation these became more substantial but still did not usually dwell at length on rifle club matters, as in examples such as E. Hutton, Military Forces of the Commonwealth of Australia, Annual Report, Govt. Printer, Melbourne, 1903; Annual Report for the Year 1905 by the Inspector-General of the Commonwealth Military Forces, Major-General H. Finn, 1 January 1906, Robert Brain, Govt. Printer, Melbourne, 1906 or I. Hamilton, Report on an Inspection of the Military Forces of the Commonwealth of Australia, Albert J. Mullett, Govt. Printer, Melbourne, 1913. 29 For example, ‘Report on the State Rifle Associations, District Rifle Club Unions, and Rifle Clubs for the year ended 30 June 1914’, Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia, 2 December 1914, Albert J. Mullett, Govt. Printer, Melbourne, 1914. 17
commands, but these are relatively small in volume when compared, for example, to the collection of records on the less useful subjects of administration of clubs and rifle ranges for example.
Major sources on rifle shooting and organizational developments, especially in the associations, are the newspapers of the day, and rifle association annual reports, when available. Newspapers in particular offer a comprehensive overview of the rifle shooting movement across Australia from colonial times to 1941 (some years offer more than 3,000 articles and reports on rifle shooting). Even rifle association reports, sometimes the only extant copy, can sometimes be found reported verbatim in the local newspapers.
Other sources of information informing this thesis include Government Gazettes, official regulations and instructions; yearbooks; Parliamentary reports on defence and colonial encyclopedias; histories of rifle shooting associations and clubs, and sources devoted to the technical aspects of rifles and rifle shooting, along with academic theses which offer some insights into the rifle shooting movement. Other source material includes a range of historical articles of highly variable quality in rifle shooting magazines and the newsletters of rifle associations. Post-Federation, there are also a number of articles and opinion pieces in semi-official and official journals.30
The rifle club movement and its relationship with defence in Australia is an important piece in the complex jigsaw of the development of defence in Australia from 1860. It is also a subject which has been neglected as a subject for serious study. However, the fact of 100,000 riflemen across Australia, ought not be ignored. This thesis will be a first step in addressing the important questions as to how this ‘movement’ and its peak bodies came about and how it was supported by successive colonial, Commonwealth and State Governments over 1861-1941 with infrastructure, ammunition
30 Examples include: M. Purser, ‘A Word in Favour of Rifle Shooting - A Reply’, The Commonwealth Military Journal, Vol.4, Albert J. Mullett, Govt. Printer, Melbourne, 1913, pp. 736-39 and ‘Some Reasons why the Citizen Forces do not Compete at NRA Meetings’, The Commonwealth Military Journal, Vol.6, Albert J. Mullett, Govt. Printer, Melbourne, 1915, pp. 555-57 or J.S. Lyster, ‘The Promotion and Encouragement of Rifle Shooting’, Journal and Proceedings of the USI of NSW, Vol.16, 1904, pp. 61-82. 18
and funding. The thesis will attempt to explain the evolution of the rifle shooting movement from its amateurish beginnings in the 1860s to its final status as defence reserves. It will examine how the ‘rifle club movement’ became an integral part of defence doctrine and policy, what influence it had on defence and what contribution it actually made, especially during the Boer War, World War One and in the lead-up to World War Two.
Moreover, this dissertation will review the role of the prominent political and military personalities who supported the movement, as well as the structure, control and operations of rifle clubs. The essential contradictions between the attitudes of civilian rifle clubs and associations (with their emphasis on target shooting) and those of the military (with its emphasis on shooting under service conditions), fundamentally affected the relationship between the two and led to breakdowns in the formal relationship with Army, most notably in 1920 and in the years that followed to 1941. These contradictions are central to the thesis. These are important historical questions in their own right – they matter to understandings of Australian and military history.
19
Chapter 1
Rifle shooting and the Volunteers to 1870
Rifles and hand-guns were part and parcel of colonial Australia. At first they were used to help supplement the meagre diets of the first colonists and for security. Military arms (the muzzle-loading Brown Bess and later, 1853 Pattern Enfield rifled percussion muskets) were also possessed by the various British Army regiments and their detachments which both garrisoned the new colonies and guarded the convicts in those colonies which had them.31 Guns also became associated with explorers and bushrangers. However, rifle shooting for sport rather than for utilitarian purposes also began to grow in popularity, especially given the dearth of early entertainment in the first settlements. Even the rifle contests held between regimental detachments were a break from the monotony of barracks life.
It is no surprise then that there were some very early attempts to form rifle clubs. The Adelaide Rifle Company, the earliest of them all, began in 1838. The company ‘was to be, in fact, a rifle club, and the promoters were possibly more interested in target practice as a sport than in making their members proficient as rifle shots for the purpose of defence.’32 The first recorded rifle club in NSW was in Sydney, formed in Parramatta in 1843. It held an annual prize shoot each January from 1844.33 The Adelaide German Shooting Company (the Adelaider Deutsche Schuetzen Gesellschaft)
31 Four companies of Marines arrived in 1788 and 25 regiments of British Infantry came between 1788 and 1870. Royal Marines served aboard Royal Navy vessels based at Sydney until 1913. http://www.awm.gov.au/atwar/colonial.asp accessed 27 July 2013. 32 H.G. Zwillenberg, ‘Citizens and Soldiers: The Defence of South Australia 1836-1901’, MA Thesis, University of Adelaide, 1969, p. 60. 33 Shooting was not too onerous - firing at 18 inch targets at ‘no less than 100 yards’ - and its rule book brief: Rules and Regulations of the Sydney Rifle Club, D. Wall, Sydney, 1849, pp. 1-8. Sydney Morning Herald, 4 January 1845, p. 2; H. J. Zwillenberg, ‘The Military in South Australia, 1836-1854’, Honours Thesis, University of Adelaide, 1964, p. 13; J.E. Corcoran, The Target Rifle in Australia 1860-1900, p. 17. 1
was formed in 1853, with another formed in Tanunda in 1856, while some rifle clubs in Tasmania had formed as early as 1858.34 Rifle matches and community sport went hand-in-hand. For example, a rifle match was conducted alongside the first ploughing match arranged by the Ulladulla Agricultural and Horticultural Association in NSW in July 1855.35 There was in addition, a gamut of informal social sporting rifle groups firing at makeshift targets or at released birds or other local game. All these activities were supported by a number of early gunsmiths who built, repaired and maintained the wide variety of muzzle-loader rifles and rarer breech-loading long arms then in use, as recorded in numerous advertisements in newspapers of the day and the appointment of official gunsmiths to colonial rifle associations when formed from 1860.
Over time, citizens in the colonies in Australia became anxious about perceived vulnerability to external threats.36 With the gold rushes in full swing in Victoria from 1851, anxiety in this colony increased further and some early Volunteer ‘corps’ were formed. In Victoria volunteers had been recruited into the German Rifle Club in Geelong since July [1854], and within several months, the German Rifle Club and the Geelong Volunteer Rifle Club had been amalgamated to form the Geelong Volunteer Rifle Corps.37 In NSW as well, Volunteer units such as the 1st NSW Rifle Volunteers were raised; it conducted rifle matches in the mid-1850s.
The trend of converting rifle enthusiasts into semi-military units continued. In 1854, with the Crimean War underway, the NSW authorities: ‘…eagerly grasped at an offer by Mr. Pettingell, ‘a
34 V. Potezny, ‘South Australian German Shooting Companies (Kingship and Ring Target Shooting)’, unpub., provided by author to A. Kilsby, February 2010. See for example, the Mercury 16 July 1858, p. 2 and 23 July 1858, p. 2. For a good background on the early volunteers and rifle clubs see M. Austin, ‘The Foundation of Australia's Army Reserves: 1788-1854’, Parts 1-5, Defence Force Journal, Nos. 33-37, November-December 1982. 35 B.C. Bell, ‘Milton Rifle Club 1861-1970’, The Marksman, Vol.22, No.5, October 1970, p. 22. 36 The colonies were NSW (from 1788, with self-rule from 1825), Tasmania (separated from NSW in 1825, self-rule in the same year), South Australia (from 1836, self-rule in 1856; gained the Northern Territory from 1863 to 1911), Victoria (separated from NSW in 1851, self-rule in 1855), Queensland (from 1859 - until then part of NSW) and Western Australia (from 1829, self-rule 1890). 37 R. Austin, Bold, Steady and Faithful, The History of the 6th Battalion, the Royal Melbourne Regiment 1854-1993, 6th Battalion Association, Melbourne, 1993, p. 3. 2
respectable inhabitant of Sydney’, to convert the Sydney Rifle Club…in the habit of practising behind Victoria Barracks, into a Volunteer Rifle Company.’38 In South Australia, Volunteers were also formed as early as 1855, among the first being the South Australian Free Rifle Company or ‘Free Rifles’, constituted from men living within 15 kilometres of Adelaide. The aim of these Volunteers were: ‘the attainment of the highest possible degree of perfection in the art of rifle shooting, to purchase all of their own rifles and equipment, and in time of War to pledge themselves to assist in the defence of the Colony by enrolling as Volunteers under clause 15 of Act No.2 of 1854 [the Volunteer Military Force Act]. In doing so they would set the best possible example.’39
These short-lived Volunteer ‘corps’ were militarily amateurish but very sociable. Rifle matches between Volunteer units were an integral part of the character of the Volunteers. The musketry was generally poor: ‘Comment on the firing of this match is almost unnecessary, the score showing how extremely bad it was throughout’, noted a Brisbane newspaper, and the Volunteers were often seen as figures ripe for parody.40 The Imperial garrison regiments and detachments, understandably, stood somewhat aloof from these developments. However, political and military events in England were soon to push Volunteers and rifle shooting in the Australian colonies on to a more serious stage.
In England, soon after the Crimean War, the country was agog in 1859 with the possibility that Napoleon III intended to invade. In a surge of patriotism, tens of thousands volunteered to join corps of riflemen and artillery companies. The result was a huge upsurge of interest among citizens in rifle shooting, both within the Volunteer movement and more generally. The British National Rifle Association (NRA) was formed in 1859 with the support of senior Royals, the aristocracy and senior military figures to promote rifle shooting and the Volunteers. In July 1860 Queen Victoria herself fired the first shot at the NRA’s Wimbledon range by pulling a silken cord attached to the trigger of the carefully prepared rifle. Not surprisingly, she scored a bull’s-eye. In 1861 the NRA had 1,387
38 M. Austin, ‘The Foundation of Australia's Army Reserves: 1788-1854 Parts 1-5, Defence Force Journal, Nos. 34, May/June 1982, p. 53. 39 F. Garie, ‘The South Australian Free Rifles’, Sabretache, Vol.23, July-September 1982, p.22. 40 Brisbane Courier, 9 November 1869, p. 3. 3
members; by 1866 it had 2,946.41 There were by this time over 150,000 Volunteers under arms. Rifle shooting in Britain at this time set the pattern, with many of the same appeals that would be found in Australia:
… it was a sport for all classes…The annual Wimbledon meeting was the climax to the year’s rifle- shooting…royal patronage and social acceptance were important to the spread of rifle-shooting…Yet… By the 1870s Volunteers were to complain that the counter-attractions of cricket and football were depriving them of potential recruits. Shooting remained popular, and without it the Volunteer Force would probably have collapsed…it was not only the rifle-shooting itself which was seen to be attractive, it was also the prizes which could be won…42
The early waves of Volunteers in Britain were staunchly middle-class and were attracted as much to the appeal of the new technology and individualistic application of rifle-shooting science as the prizes on offer at matches. There was, however, ‘more to the rifle than this. The Victorians invested it with romance, and placed it in history—it was the English longbow in modern form. No writer on the rifle could resist the comparison.’43 In any case, with the Queen’s blessing of the NRA, news of the early success of the NRA quickly reached the Australian colonies and discussions began among like-minded colonists as to how to establish their own rifle associations. Rifle shooting in Australia, as in Britain, quickly became both patriotic and popular for Volunteers and citizens alike.
By early 1861 rifle associations had been formed in NSW, Victoria and South Australia, dominated by prominent civic figures and Volunteer officers. Volunteer corps (and a few rifle clubs of citizens firing privately-owned small-bore rifles) were also formed throughout the colonies and rifle shooting competitions began in earnest. By December 1861 the strength of local forces in the various Australian colonies was 4,002.44 One boost for the ranks of the Volunteers came with the despatch in 1860 of British Imperial troops from their garrison duties in the Australian colonies, to New Zealand to campaign against the Maori. Volunteers in turn began to be seen in small ways as taking
41 Anon., ‘The National Rifle Association’, Masson, D. (ed.), MacMillan’s Magazine, No.93, MacMillan & Company, London, July 1867, p. 180. 42 H. Cunningham, The Volunteer Force: A Social and Political History 1859-1908, Croom Helm, London, 1975, p. 115. 43 ibid., p. 113. 44 C. Halls, Guns in Australia, Paul Hamlyn, Sydney, 1974, p. 130. 4
over some of their garrison duties, and the stature of Volunteer officers rose accordingly. Certainly ‘the desire to strengthen the moral fibre of colonial society and inculcate it with a military spirit became a common aim of British commandants during the period.’ 45
In reality, the Volunteer companies were less competent military forces than they were de facto rifle clubs, but there was no doubting their enthusiasm.46 In Britain, many Volunteer units had sports and social arms. ‘It was in this way that Volunteers were seen as primarily responsible for the popularization of sports, particularly athletics, in both ordered clubs and in the streets, whereas previously many sports had been confined to the wealthier classes.’47 In the Australian colonies, the officers were elected, drill was not too onerous, and rifle matches with the muzzle-loaders were always popular. Some of the uniforms were more eye-catching than practical; enthusiastic amateurism still ruled the day:
The local corps also sponsored a range of sporting and cultural activities including football and cricket teams to compete against civilian clubs. In addition, there were other recreational pursuits such as the Band, Volunteer theatrical and drama clubs, concerts, dances, balls and picnics, variety performances, regular lectures, Reviews and camps...the companies often marched through their respective towns providing citizens with a colourful and entertaining spectacle.48
The Volunteer forces in the Australian colonies would wax and wane as ‘war scares’ came and went over the years. The depth of the Government purse in support of Volunteers also varied accordingly, usually in direct proportion to the size of the alarm. Notwithstanding this, thousands of
45 S.J. Clarke, ‘Marching to Their Own Drum: British Officers as Military Commandants in the Australian Colonies and New Zealand 1870-1901’, PhD thesis, University of New South Wales, 1999, p. 95. 46 Some early Volunteer units faced challenges to be effective. As early as 1856, the commander of the Geelong Volunteer Rifles complained to the Inspecting Field Officer in Melbourne that his ‘present rifles were not only useless, but dangerous’. Geelong Volunteer Rifle Corps Letter Book 1856-1860, AWM 352. Portland’s Volunteer ‘corps’ was formed in September 1859. A meagre ten muskets and ten cartridges per musket were finally received in December 1860, only to be declared ‘unfit for use’. G. Bennett, Portland’s Volunteer Rifle Corps 1859-1863, Gwen Bennett, Portland, 1994, p. 2. 47 I.F.W. Beckett, Riflemen Form - A study of the Rifle Volunteer Movement 1859-1908, Ogilby Trusts, Aldershot, 1982, p. 117. 48 B. Marmion, ‘The Victorian Volunteer Force on the Central Victorian Goldfields 1858-1883’, MA Thesis, La Trobe University, 2003, p. 119. 5
volunteers including many Volunteer riflemen, were recruited or spontaneously volunteered to join the British regiments fighting the Maoris in New Zealand as the 2nd New Zealand War spluttered along over 1860-1869.49
At home in Australia, marksmanship gradually improved along with the improved technology of rifles and ammunition. The Brigade Major of the Victorian Volunteer Force, Major Dean Pitt, was to claim even as early as August 1862 that the average percentage of qualified marksmen in the Victorian Volunteers was 27.73 per cent and that this compared very favourably to Imperial Regiments (average 6.92 per cent) and with the School of Musketry, Hythe (average 19.23 per cent).50 This quickly drew an official comment from the British commander of forces in the Australian colonies, Major-General Pratt:
No fair comparison can be made of the shooting of regular soldiers and the Volunteers of Victoria; the former fires only a small annual regulated allowance of ammunition, the latter, in addition to a regulated allowance, can practice to any extent his wishes or means admit of. The rifle-shooting is excellent, and I would only add that there is a risk of this being made too much the object of the force, to the exclusion of real organisation and system. 51
This was an important comment and it was the first of many that would appear over the coming decades where the shooting skills of Volunteers, and later militia and rifle club men, would be compared to that of the regular soldier. The military viewpoint, that soldiers needed to have other skills apart from functional rifle shooting while part-time soldiers and rifle club men needed military skills other than marksmanship to make them more ‘efficient’ as potential soldiers in wartime, will be a major recurring theme as seen in later chapters of this thesis.
49 J. Hopkins-Weise, Blood Brothers - The Anzac Genesis, Wakefield Press, Adelaide, 2009, pp. 105-109. 50 ‘Report on the course of musketry instruction of the Force which commenced on the 15 September 1861 and concluded on the 31st August 1862’, p. 2, Victorian Parliamentary Proceedings, 1862/63 Vol. 3. 51 ‘Memo from T. S. Pratt, Major-General Commanding to Sir Henry Barkly, KCB, Victorian Treasurer, 30 October 1862,’ Military Correspondence Victoria, John Ferres, Govt. Printer, Melbourne, 1862, p. 4. 6
From 1860 colonial rifle associations on the British model were formally established. NSW was the first to form such an association, on 15 October 1860 (the NSWRA). Victoria was close behind, on 1 December 1860 (the VRA). But it was the Victorians who got off to a quick start in terms of organised shooting with the VRA’s first annual match competition shot from 29 December 1860 to 2 January 1861 on the Sandridge Butts, at Emerald Hill in Melbourne. The NSWRA finally shot its first annual matches at the Randwick Racecourse on 26-28 September 1861. These two colonies were already highly competitive. NSW had the larger population and more established industry; Victoria had gold and saw itself as more progressive. Now the two colonies had rifle shooting to add to their rivalry and it was not long before the first inter-colonial rifle matches were being organised.
South Australia declared the formation of its own rifle association (SARA) on 14 January 1861 while Queensland, no longer part of NSW and proclaimed as a separate colony only the year before, established the Queensland Rifle Association (QRA) on 15 May 1861. Tasmania established its rifle association (the TRA) on 9 March 1864 with the help of rules from the VRA.52 In Western Australia, Volunteers established ranges and conducted matches but the first rifle association in Western Australia would not be established until 1890, and then only briefly.
The various colonial rifle associations in Australia mirrored Britain’s NRA as closely as they could. The NRA in turn closely watched the British Army’s School of Musketry, located at Hythe, for any developments which might affect their own match conditions and rules. Wherever possible the colonial associations also looked to the Governors of each colony to act as their patrons so that the reflected Royal aura could add prestige to their activities. Senior government, military and civic leaders were often prominent in the associations. The NRA itself donated a silver medal to each colonial association as a shooting prize. Initially at least, each new colonial rifle association resembled the others in form and function. Inevitably however, they began to develop in their own way, as different types of rifles, Volunteer and militia organisations and their commanders’ personalities and interests, availability and location of rifle ranges and the level of government
52 Mercury, 11 April 1864, p. 2, and 30 May 1864, p. 2. 7
support all began to influence how the various colonial rifle associations were managed and governed.
Rifle matches organised by the colonial rifle associations were inevitably dominated by local Volunteer rifle corps. The presentation of prizes were great social occasions, normally conducted in the town halls of the major cities, with the Governor presenting the prizes, accompanied by extensive newspaper coverage.53 This continued to be the case right into the 1890s, when the first recession hit the colonial economies. Socially, rifle shooting was an increasingly popular sporting activity, especially in the country areas. Politically, as a number of prominent Volunteer officers were also members of local parliaments, volunteering and rifle association meetings came together almost seamlessly.
The leadership of the associations came from the top levels of colonial society. Some foundation members of organised rifle shooting in Australia included for example, chief justices, colonial administrators, colonial Governors, colonial Treasurers, Speakers of the houses of Parliament and members of both upper and lower houses where they existed.54 Leading civic figures, themselves often well-known Volunteer officers, British Imperial officers stationed in Australia, former Imperial officers and other colonial luminaries were also prominent. Freemasons were also strongly evident in many of the early association councils, reflecting the civil and military leadership of the day. Generally, the leaders of the new movement of rifle shooting were not Catholics or men of commerce, although this was to change gradually as rifle shooting quickly established itself as one of the most popular ‘everyman’ pastimes of its day, albeit wrapped for the most part in a patriotic cloak.
Having thus far provided an overview of the colonial rifle movement up to 1870, the remainder of this chapter will examine arrangements in each colony in more depth. In NSW, the NSWRA was:
53 See, for example, the Argus, 7 January 1861, p. 5. 54 See for example, the South Australian Register, 8 January 1861, p. 3. 8
formed at the instance of several gentlemen who took a great interest in the Volunteer movement and who believed that an Association formed on the model of the National Rifle Association of England would tend to give permanency and efficiency to Volunteer Corps, by creating a spirit of emulation amongst the different companies.55
At their initial meeting on 5 October 1860, a resolution was passed that an association be formed ‘having for its object the encouragement of Rifle Corps, and the promotion of Rifle Shooting throughout the Colony.’56 It was a model copied by the other colonies.
In the chair of that first meeting of the NSWRA was Sir William Montagu Manning, barrister and politician. A Scot, he was highly influential in the early Legislative Council of the colony, work recognised by a knighthood later conferred by Queen Victoria. He was also elected first president of the NSWRA, a position he was to hold for the next 35 years (he would die in that office in 1895).57 Rules were drafted for the NSWRA based on those of Britain’s NRA and 250 members joined in the first year. The Committee was managed by a number of influential civilians and Volunteer officers. The first match at the Randwick racecourse, courtesy of the Australian Jockey Club (which took a third of the takings for the matches), was a moderate success. ‘Before this event members of the [Sydney Battalion of Volunteers] assisted in clearing scrub and erecting booths for the spectators. During the match they acted as scorers, markers, ricochet–markers and buglers, as well as providing some competitors.’58 The Volunteers were urged by the NSWRA committee to get more practice with their long Enfield muzzle-loaders after the inevitable comparison to shooting scores at Wimbledon, the home of the NRA. The Government, nonetheless, contributed an annual grant of £200 to encourage and support the NSWRA.
55 NSWRA Report for the Year ending 31 December 1861, Thomas Richards, Govt. Printer, Sydney, 1862, p. 5. 56 ibid. 57 Manning was walking next to the Duke of Edinburgh in Sydney on 12 March 1868, when an Irishman fired at the Duke, wounding him. Manning believed he had saved the Duke’s life by lunging at the would-be assassin’s pistol. His standing among the patriots of the Colony no doubt went even higher as a result and gave the riflemen a president to be especially proud of. M. Rutledge, 'Manning, Sir William Montagu (1811 - 1895)', Australian Dictionary of Biography, Vol.5, Melbourne University Press, 1974, pp. 207-09. 58 R. Sutton, ‘The Genealogy of a Volunteer Infantry Unit’, Despatch, Vol.9, No.8, 1974, p. 108. 9
Competition prizes were provided by the NSWRA, and included, apart from the association trophy, a ‘range judging telescope’, some individual cash prizes of up to £50, and an array of prize rifles (purchased especially from England) and carbines including Whitworth, Westley-Richards breech-loading, General Hay’s Pattern, Calisher & Terry’s patent breech-loading and Lancaster types. Of the seven matches held in the inaugural annual prize competition run by the NSWRA, only one was open to non-Volunteers. There were no civilian rifle clubs allowed. The prizes for the matches were usually given out by the wife of the NSW Governor.59 While a ‘Small-Bore Rifle Club’ was formed in 1863, purely civilian rifle clubs would remain a rarity in NSW for years to come, and the rifle association prize meetings were kept, in the main and as a matter of policy, to Volunteers only.60 As rifle shooting at Randwick racecourse was entirely unregulated, there was constant danger to passers-by and animals alike from stray bullets, so a new military range was established at Paddington in 1866. This gave a real impetus to organised rifle shooting in the colony under the auspices of the NSWRA. Although matches were strictly for the military, at least Honorary members of the NSWRA had a chance to shoot as well when a match was introduced for them in 1868; this was more a sop to the wealthy and politically connected individual than to non-military rifle clubs, which were, as earlier pointed out, still a rarity.
It did not take long before the colonial rifle associations began to consider inter-colonial competitions. It was the two great colonial rivals, NSW and Victoria, which arranged for the first series of small-bore [calibre less than .577] competitions from 1862, for a bronze Challenge Shield. There were constant disagreements about rules and somewhat of an ‘arms race’ was initiated as each colony vied to be the first to acquire the latest match rifles from England to give a winning technological edge at the matches.61 In part, the initial agreement stated:
59 NSWRA Report for the Year ending 31st December 1861, Thomas Richards, Govt. Printer, Sydney, 1862, pp. 1-25. 60 H.E. Mills, The National Rifle Association of New South Wales Official Jubilee Souvenir, 1909 : a History of the past 50 years of Rifle Shooting in New South Wales, NRA of NSW, Sydney, 1909, p. 11. 61 Anon., ‘The Bronze Challenge Shield’, Marksman, Vol. 37, No.1, February 1985, p. 1; J. Corcoran, ‘The NSW Rigby Rifles’, Arms Calvacade, July 1974, p. 56. 10
…Each colony to be represented by ten (10) members of its Volunteer Force, who shall have been enrolled for three months prior to the date of the match. The distances to be 200, 300, 500, 600, 700, 800, and 900 yards; ten rounds at each; Hythe position; with any rifle not exceeding 10 lbs., with pull of trigger not less than three (3) lbs., and without sling or telescopic sight. Each competitor to use the same rifle throughout, unless, in case of accident, permitted by the Committee to change...62
At first the arrangements for the inter-colonial matches were primitive by later standards: ‘No glasses for the purpose of seeing the position of the shot marks on the target were allowed on the ground, nor were there indications of any kind permitted’. 63 But the matches themselves seized the public imagination. They were keenly contested and remarkably popular. They were not just widely reported in the press but attended by the cream of society. The top marksmen were lionised with homecoming parties and presentations. Annual intercolonial matches saw NSW the eventual winner in 1867. This gave them, after three wins in a row, perpetual ownership of the trophy. Intercolonial shoots then lapsed until 1873, mostly because the VRA was in financial and administrative difficulties.64
Meanwhile, in 1868 the NSW Volunteer Force was re-organised. One of the principal measures implemented under the new Volunteer Regulation Act of 1867 was a grant of 50 acres of land to be given to Volunteers for five years efficient service. This helped to expand the Volunteer force from
2,498 men to 3,232 men by 1870. While the increase in enrolments can be partially attributed to the land grant,
perhaps just as important was the great interest in the sport of rifle shooting in the Victorian age. Being a member of a Volunteer unit gave a man a chance to involve himself in
62 Report of the New South Wales Rifle Association for the year ended 31 December 1861’, Thomas Richards, Sydney, 1862, pp. 8-10, and p. 46. 63 Report of the New South Wales Rifle Association for the year ended 31 December 1863’, Thomas Richards, Sydney, 1864, pp. 9-10 and pp. 45-46. 64 From 1869 the two colonies fired at least one ‘simultaneous match’ (teams fired on their home range with scores exchanged by post or later, by telegram) while discussions went ahead for a resumption of the inter-colonial matches with military, large-bore, weapons. Simultaneous matches had been an NRA initiative for riflemen throughout the Empire, and had resulted in wins for NSW riflemen in 1868. Report of the New South Wales Rifle Association for the year ended 31 December 1868’, Thomas Richards, Sydney, 1869, pp. 7 and pp. 45-46. 11
competition and regular weapons’ training at Government expense. Also, the war in Europe excited much military enthusiasm, swept along by articles in the Sydney Morning Herald which proclaimed the benefits of the universal military training.65
In Victoria, the VRA followed a similar path to NSW. Not to be outdone by their fellow colonists in NSW, on 14 December 1860 the VRA announced its committee—stacked with a formidable range of dignitaries and Volunteer officers. The president was the Governor, Sir Henry Barkly, while the committee included the Parliamentary Speaker, the Chief Justice and a future Chief Justice (Sir Redmond Barry), the Chief Secretary, the Treasurer, nine Legislative Council and Assembly members of parliament and the Volunteer commander, Colonel George Dean Pitt, his senior commanders and a host of junior staff officers. Somewhat unusually, the Secretary of the Committee was listed as Professor Martin Howy Irving, MA, who was actually a Volunteer officer (later lieutenant-colonel and a VRA vice-president in 1888). 66
Organised for ‘the encouragement of rifle shooting among all classes of the community, especially among the Volunteers’, the VRA aimed to have two meetings a year. This ambitious programme was rarely achieved. The first meeting was held soon after on 29 and 31 December 1860, and on 1 January 1861, giving the VRA the honour of holding the first rifle association match meeting in the Australian colonies. From the start the VRA recognised there were riflemen other than Volunteers— three matches were open only to Victorian Volunteers using their Lancaster and Enfield regulation rifles, but the remaining four matches were open to all comers.67 Twenty-five individual civilian
65 D.W. Eyland, ‘The New South Wales Military Forces 1780-1890: Social Composition and Status’, BA Honours Thesis, University of New South Wales, 1992, p. 8. 66 Victorian Rifle Association: Meeting 28 November 1888: Official Programme and Scoring Book, np, Melbourne 1888, p. 9; Irving was prominent at the University of Melbourne where he founded their University Boat Club and later the Melbourne Rowing Regatta. He was also a member of the Philosophical Institute of Victoria and the Royal Society of Victoria. G.C. Fendley, 'Irving, Martin Howy (1831-1912)', Australian Dictionary of Biography, Vol. 4, Melbourne University Press, 1972, pp. 462-464. 67 Volunteer company, rifle association and rifle club activities, even those from other colonies, were reported upon generously in newspapers, some short-lived, like Bell’s Life in Victoria, published between January 1863 and August 1865. For example, the first edition of the Victorian Review - A Journal of the Volunteer forces & Civil Service, Bankers & Insurance Record & Literary Gazette, published on 21 December 1861, contained the advertisement advising of the formation of the VRA, while later editions reported at length on VRA matches and other Volunteer musketry practices. 12
riflemen joined the Volunteers in the all comers’ matches and one Volunteer from the Adelaide Rifles also competed. In 1862, Lieutenant Sutherland of the Adelaide Free Rifles won the VRA’s Gold Cup at the annual matches.
As in NSW, however, no civilian rifle clubs competed in the VRA matches. Over 225 Volunteers competed in the first match and overall competitor numbers remained high throughout. Apart from the gold and silver medals of the Association, all other prizes were in cash; altogether worth £505.68 Most Volunteers were unpaid, only their arms being provided by the colonial Government: ‘They were therefore a cheap form of defence, a perennial consideration for governments that, while occasionally aroused to military enthusiasm, were generally inclined to prefer inexpensive defences. But Volunteers were free to resign at any time (units faded as the rifle craze waned).’69 As the VRA was to discover, Government enthusiasm could also fade.
In 1863 the Victorian Volunteer Force of more than 3,600 was re-organised into thirteen rifle companies, seven artillery companies, one corps of engineers, and a naval brigade of two companies.70 This re-organisation also helped to regulate the VRA annual prize matches further and encourage inter-unit musketry competitions.71 That year was also notable for the first volunteer enlistments from among these same Volunteer units for service in New Zealand. More than 2,400 men would volunteer for New Zealand over the next few years from Victoria and the other colonies; the vast majority were riflemen members of the Volunteers.72 Postal or simultaneous matches began in Victoria too. For example the Bendigo Volunteers competed
68 VRA Report for the Eight Months ending 28 February 1871, John Ferres, Govt. Printer, Melbourne, 1872, pp. 53-60. 69 P. Stanley, ‘ “Soldiers and Fellow Countrymen” in Colonial Australia’, McKernan, M. & Browne, M. (ed), Australia: Two Centuries of War and Peace, p. 81. 70 W.B. Calder, Heroes and Gentlemen: Colonel Tom Price and the Victorian Mounted Rifles, Jimaringle Publications, Melbourne, 1985, p. 3. 71 W. Westgarth, The Colony of Victoria: Its History, Commerce, and Gold Mining; Its Social and Political Institutions; Down to the End of 1863, With Remarks, Incidental and Comparative, Upon the Other Australian Colonies, Sampson, Low, Son and Marston, London, 1864, p. 369. 72 F. Glen, Australians at War in New Zealand, Wilsonscott Publishing International Ltd., Christchurch, 2011, p. 13. J. Hopkins-Weisse, J., Blood Brothers: the Anzac Genesis, p. 236, claims up to 3,000 men volunteered. 13
against the champion English Volunteer unit in 1865.73 These kinds of international matches remained popular into the 1880s, more so when postal results were superseded by telegraph once it reached Australia in 1870. Despite its auspicious beginning, the VRA found itself in financial difficulties at the very time when NSW had finally won the intercolonial Challenge Shield. This was caused in large part because the Victorian Parliament did not make any grants for rifle shooting from 1867 to 1869.74
In the proceedings of the Council in 1870 two men were noted who would have much influence on the development of rifle shooting in Victoria and Australia, namely Volunteer Captains Frederick Sargood and John Montgomery Templeton. 75 The VRA only had 54 ordinary members at this stage and so depended almost entirely on donations and match entry fees from Volunteers to develop the Association. From this point the Victorian Government provided a small grant of £300; by 1871 the total value of prizes offered had only risen to £646.76
The annual competition meeting of the VRA in October 1870, still held at the Sandridge Butts, was notable. Volunteer and civilian competitors from South Australia, Western Australia, NSW, and New Zealand (and some local individual civilians) showed up to compete—along with no less than six Victorian civilian rifle clubs which had by now affiliated themselves to the VRA for the day in order to join the matches.77 While the Imperial garrison troops were to leave Victoria forever in
73 W.E. Thomason, Marching On: The Bendigo Regiments and Companies 1858-1988, Bendigo Militaria Museum, Bendigo, 1989, p. 13. 74 P.S. Lang, Index to the Minute Books of the Victorian Rifle Association 1873-1906, J. Haase Printer, Melbourne, 1906, p. 5. 75 Sargood became Victoria’s first Minister for Defence in 1884 and Templeton became commander of rifle clubs in Victoria, and chairman of the Victorian Rifle Association as well as of the first national council of rifle associations. Rickard, J., 'Sargood, Sir Frederick Thomas (1834–1903)', Australian Dictionary of Biography, National Centre of Biography, Australian National University,
that year, the Volunteer movement, supported by the VRA and the apparent vibrancy of its annual prize matches, seemed ready to take up the challenge of defending Victoria.
Further west, the South Australians formed their own rifle association on 14 January 1861. It held its first matches in late October that year. The inaugural SARA Committee was a veritable social list of VIPs, including an even higher number of Parliamentarians than in the other colonies. This perhaps was a reflection of the size of South Australia’s civic population and the restricted entertainments offered in that colony, as much as interest in SARA itself. Indeed, Parliamentarians on the first committee included six Government ministers as well as several Volunteer officers. The president in the new SARA was the Governor, Sir Richard Graves MacDonnell, ‘an enthusiastic member of local rifle and archery clubs and keenly interested in the volunteer defence movement.’78 Other members of the committee were the Chief Justice, Sir Charles Cooper and South Australia’s first resident Commissioner, Sir James Hurtle Fisher. The Secretary was George Strickland Kingston (later knighted), the first Speaker of the House of Assembly and also a Captain of the East Adelaide Rifles.
There were a number of delays in preparing for the first matches. A range had to be secured and prepared; three butts were eventually developed on the Volunteer range in the South Parklands within the Adelaide town boundaries. The land was formally reserved and prizes were made by local jewellers or ordered from England. The Governor then took ill for several weeks, which delayed the planned competitions. There were also disputes between the independent South Australian Free
Williamstown Rifle Club, Bendigo Rifle Club, Geelong Rifle Club and Ballarat Rifle Club. One of the earliest civilian rifle clubs, formed in Beechworth in 1865, did not compete, presumably because it was too far to travel. H. German-Poyntz, ‘Formed by German Settlers - History of the Beechworth Rifle Club No.9’, On Target, Vol.1, No.4, February-March 1980, p. 22. 78 C.C. Manhood, 'MacDonnell, Sir Richard Graves (1814 - 1881)', Australian Dictionary of Biography, Vol. 5, Melbourne University Press, 1974, pp. 148-49. 15
Rifles company and the ‘regular’ Volunteer companies over the right to compete for Government prizes for Volunteers in matches fired after the conclusion of the SARA match programme.79
Meanwhile, in July 1861 a Volunteer officer with the South Australian Free Rifles, Allan McFarlane, had travelled at his own expense to England to compete at the NRA annual meeting at Wimbledon: ‘A most helpful sign was the presence of the first Colonial competitor Mr. MacFarlane, who competed in the first stage of the Queen’s, and won one of the “Extra” prizes.’80 In doing so McFarlane pioneered the long tradition of individuals and teams competing internationally in rifle shooting from Australia. But it was not until 1876 that an ‘Australian’ colonial team went to shoot in England for the first time.
The first SARA matches were finally held between 29 October and 4 November 1861, with a day off for Sunday. Over 330 competitors, all Volunteers, competed in six matches and a derby, with Government prize matches for efficient Volunteers competed for on the last day. Enfield muzzle- loaders predominated. Prizes were handed out the following week by the Governor’s wife, and over 2,000 people came along to join in the affair.81 It was the best attended set of matches for some time to come as South Australia suffered more than other colonies with regard to periodic Volunteer ‘restructuring’. One suggestion from the press was that ‘ “one or two bands, at least, should be employed to fill up the lugubrious intervals with cheerful sounds”, thus giving spirit to the proceedings and rendering such matches still more attractive.’82 Although the Volunteer rifle corps [units] continued to have their own regular musketry matches, the annual SARA matches depended heavily on Volunteers turning up to shoot, so attendances on the day (and therefore income to the association) could be unpredictable as Volunteer numbers rose and fell.
79 See F. Garie, ‘The South Australian Free Rifles’, Sabretache, Vol.23, July-September 1982, pp. 21-29; M. Willmore, The Formation of the South Australian Rifle Association, January 7, 1861, South Australian Rifle Association, Adelaide, 1985, p. 10. 80 A.P. Humphry, T.F. Fremantle, et al, History of the National Rifle Association during its first fifty years, 1859 to 1909, Bowes & Bowes, 1914, p. 43. MacFarlane was also a member of the South Australia Free Rifles. 81 South Australian Advertiser, 28 October 1861, p. 2, and 9 November 1861, p. 2. 82 G.H. Manning, ‘The Russians are Coming: the Defence of colonial South Australia 1837-1900’, unpub., Adelaide, 2003, npn, State Library of South Australia. See
In South Australia, British Imperial detachments often joined in the annual matches. For example, at the 1862 matches the 40th Regiment detachment in Adelaide competed against 24 Volunteer companies.83 The Imperial men, regarding themselves as superior to the local Volunteers, could not resist a good rifle match to prove the point. But these matches led to bigger ideas. South Australia was the first to initiate an international ‘postal match’, in 1862, with a repeat match in 1864.84 The South Australians were from Alan McFarlane’s Milang Volunteer Company while the English team consisted of marksmen of the same company of the First Robinhoods (Nottingham) against which the Bendigo Rifles would later compete in 1865.
Despite these obvious boosts to rifle-shooting in the colony, SARA faced serious challenges. A large part of the difficulties facing the association was finding a convenient range to fire on, especially after the Government removed the butts in the parklands as development in Adelaide encroached upon the space, and safety issues inevitably arose. Other problems were a lack of Government grants and having to shoot with worn-out Enfield rifles.
The South Australian Volunteers continued to drill and conduct rifle shooting matches, but the Volunteer movement was in a parlous state in this colony, not least because of lack of Government support. A new Volunteer Act in 1865 repealed all previous Volunteer legislation in South Australia, but it did provide for rifle shooting prize competitions which at least kept the basic skills alive.85 While there were now ten infantry companies in the new Volunteer Reserve Force, ‘in fact, they were nothing else but sporting rifle clubs, loosely associated to the military through the [SARA].’86 SARA held no annual matches from 1866 (until 1873) and the defence capabilities of the
83 Advertiser, 4 October 1938, p.21. 84 H.G. Zwillenberg, ‘Citizens and Soldiers: The Defence of South Australia 1836-1901’, p. 298. 85 L. Wilkins, ‘The Bated Shining Sword: The Colonial Defence Force as a Mirror of Colonial Society in South Australia 1836-1901, BA Honours Thesis, University of Adelaide, 1983, pp. 49-50. 86 H.J. Zwillenberg, ‘The Defence of South Australia 1836-1901’, Sabretache, Vol.26, April-June 1985, pp. 18. Some rifle clubs were also formed in this period, but were not connected with the Volunteer movement. F. Fox, ‘Volunteer Companies and Rifle Clubs’, SA Rifle News, Vol.23, No.2, June 1986, p. 10. 17
small colony was to deteriorate further in 1870, when, in common with the other colonies, the British Imperial garrison detachments were withdrawn. The Governor of South Australia, addressing the 18th Royal Irish Regiment on the occasion of their departure, opined:
In future the colonies will have to look to their own defence; and, as far as South Australia is concerned, the feeling is to have a militia, though it is probable that, with a little judicious assistance on the part of the authorities, a large number of rifle clubs, that would embrace all the old volunteers, might be established throughout the length and breadth of the land. There is already a movement abroad in this direction, and the existing Country Rifle Association, both in their management and in their excellence in shooting, reflect the highest credit upon those who form them.87
However, virtually simultaneously with the withdrawal of the British Imperial detachments from South Australia and now, as a result, having to pay for defence costs entirely, the Government recalled its Enfield rifles on loan to the Volunteers and disbanded its units for good measure. Interest in and popularity of rifle shooting quickly waned: ‘the would-be defenders took up less demanding ball games, free of drill, discipline and ridicule over the utility of their efficacy.’88 It was not until 1874 that SARA was resuscitated and not until 1878 that Volunteers were re-organised in the colony once again.
Much further north, Queensland, with its small population of 20,000, was proclaimed a colony in its own right only on 6 June 1859, separating it at last from NSW.89 By February 1860, a very small Volunteer force was called for by the new Governor, and a mounted troop and two infantry companies were recruited. By the end of that year, discussion was already taking place among interested gentlemen as to the establishment of a rifle association. But with straitened Government finances, and antipathy towards military forces by both colonists and politicians alike, the Queensland Volunteer ‘army’ was stunted from the beginning. In 1862 its strength was 248, in
87 Illustrated Australian News for Home Readers, 10 September 1870, p. 158; M. Willmore, ‘History of the rifle and military forces commonly known as the volunteers in the colony of South Australia circa 1836-1910’, unpublished MS, SLSA, Adelaide, 1989, npn. 88 F. Garie, ‘A Brief History of SARA to 1900’, unpub. MS dated 17 February 2002, provided to A. Kilsby by Frank Garie, 6 March 2010, npn. 89 D.H. Johnson, Volunteers at Heart: The Queensland Defence Forces, 1860-1901, pp. 1-10. 18
1876, fourteen years later, the total number was only 415.90 This made it doubly difficult to sustain the QRA after its establishment on 15 May 1861.
The president of the QRA—from 1861 until his death in 1879—was Lieutenant Colonel Maurice Charles O’Connell (later knighted), who was also President of Queensland’s Legislative Council. Of a distinguished family, O’Connell was born in Sydney. He fought with the British Legion in the First Carlist war in Spain in the 1830s before returning to Australia and settling in Queensland. In 1861 he was also Commandant of the Local Military Forces, such as they were.91 While the Governor was to be patron, the QRA Committee contained 12 members including some Legislative Council members, five Volunteer officers and other well-regarded gentlemen. At the follow-on meeting after its founding, O’Connell had evidently drummed up more support when two Ministers and the Chief Justice, among others, came on board.92
The QRA adopted the rules of the British NRA, but these were flexibly applied when the first matches got underway.93 On 15 September 1863 that the first matches began at a range near the main cemetery in Toowong, Brisbane; only Volunteers were allowed to participate. This competition had already been postponed twice on account of a lack of ammunition. The only existing stocks had been damaged by flood waters and new stocks did not arrive from Sydney on time for the scheduled matches.94 The paucity of reporting on the event seems indicative of the apparent lack of relative success. Only £50 was given out as prize money to supplement the first and second NRA silver medals, which had arrived in Brisbane in the previous two years but remained unused in the Governor’s safe. The delays leading up to the first matches were a symptom of the difficulties the
90 N.S. Pixley,., ‘Queensland: One Hundred Years of Defence’, Royal Historical Society of Queensland Journal, Vol.6, No.1, September 1959, p. 99. 91 H.J. Gibbney, 'O'Connell, Sir Maurice Charles (1812-1879)', Australian Dictionary of Biography, Vol.5, Melbourne University Press, 1974, pp. 350-1. 92 Courier, 16 May 1861, p. 2, and 23 May 1861, p. 2. 93 The NRA was to remain the one organisation looked up to and emulated by all colonial and later State, rifle associations. The colonial associations were beggars by comparison. In 1866 the NRA was offering £8,884 in prizes at its annual matches at Wimbledon. Anon., ‘The National Rifle Association’, Masson, D. (ed.), MacMillan’s Magazine, No.93, MacMillan & Company, London, July 1867, p. 179. 94 Courier, 24 August 1863, p. 2. 19
QRA was to face in establishing and sustaining itself in the face of tight Government spending (especially where it concerned the Volunteers) and public indifference. The original QRA was to collapse from this lack of support, not to mention from its own failing finances, by the end of 1869.
Rifle shooting as the foundation for Queensland’s defences was thus always in question given the paucity of Volunteers—1862 saw a mounted rifles unit of just ten men with 50 infantry in Brisbane and less than 100 in northern Queensland (including three men in Maryborough) while only 34 men comprised Queensland’s artillery corps. 95 Even with the passage of a new Queensland Defence Act in 1864, there was only a one target range available in Brisbane for any practice, and this range was used by the Imperial 50th Regiment, although it was ‘occasionally made available for use by the Volunteers.’ 96
The press in Queensland was usually hostile towards a military of any kind and saw the rifle shooting movement in the similar light:
The Rifle Volunteer movement has never been very popular here, for a variety of reasons. The population is, for the most part, a newly-settled one, and very few persons can spare the necessary time; the bulk of the young men, too, can hardly be said to be settled at all, but frequently shift about from one part of the colony to another, as necessity or inclination dictates. Above all, the Legislature have, of late years, looked very coldly on the movement and, except to a very limited extent, they have neither given it their countenance or support. 97
A week later, local press opinion of musketry proficiency remained low:
Comment on the firing of this match [the annual meeting of the [QRA]] is almost unnecessary, the score showing how extremely bad it was throughout. The winner made only half the possible score, and the average of the ten shots was only eleven. We expected, after the inferior shooting at the long ranges last year, to see some improvement during these matches, and regret that it was not so. Good
95 N.S. Pixley, ‘Queensland: One Hundred Years of Defence’, Royal Historical Society of Queensland Journal, Vol.6, No.1, September 1959, p. 96. 96 A.T. Jackson, Southern Queensland Rifle Association Jubilee, 1877-1927: a brief History of the Association during the past Fifty Years, p. 5. 97 Brisbane Courier, 30 October 1869, p. 2. 20
firing at short ranges may be satisfactory, but it does not carry half the credit of similar performances at long distance.98
Matters had not improved several months later:
…the firing at the long ranges was very bad indeed. This of course, arises from want of practice, and to some extent the Government are to blame. For some time past the regulation allowance of ninety rounds per annum for practice has not been given, and hence not only the bad shooting, but also the comparatively small interest taken in the sport…99
Like South Australia, the withdrawal of the British garrison saw the withdrawal of funding for the Volunteers in Parliament and the demise of the Volunteer movement—and by extension, the QRA until 1878. In Queensland, Volunteer soldiering was even less popular than in South Australia and the Government even more parsimonious once it had to pay solely for its own defence.
In a situation not dissimilar to that of Queensland, Tasmania, an even smaller colony in terms of population, had difficulties starting up a rifle association. Although there was plenty of outward enthusiasm in early 1861, by the end of 1861 the colony was in economic depression. However, the Volunteer movement in Tasmania was quite robust, with over 1,100 men enrolled in infantry companies and artillery:
The Volunteers were efficiently drilled and trained during this period, having the advantage of instructors from the British 12th and 40th Regiments of Foot. The Government provided rifle ranges, arms and ammunition with the pattern 53 Enfield rifle being issued to the infantry…The Volunteers had to pay for their own uniform, as well as entrance fees and annual subscriptions...100
98 Brisbane Courier, 9 November 1869, p. 3. 99 Brisbane Courier, 11 December 1869, p. 5. 100 D.M. Wyatt, With the Volunteers: A Historical Diary of the Volunteer Military Forces of the North-West and West Coasts of Tasmania 1886-1986, D.M. Wyatt, Tasmania, 1987, p. 3. The organisation and key personnel of the Tasmanian Volunteers can be seen in H.M. Hull, The Volunteer List - Tasmania, July 1861, ‘Mercury’ Steam Press, Hobart, 1861. 21
This compared very favourably with some of the larger colonies and championship rifle matches were quickly established between the Volunteer companies and artillery batteries, complete with medals, badges and Government prizes.101
Despite appeals to the Commander of the Volunteer Force, Colonel Frederic Brown Russell, to form a rifle association in Tasmania, little progressed. The geographic division between northern and southern Volunteers did not help. A board of officers set up to inquire into the condition and efficiency of the Volunteer Force in Tasmania recommended to the Government in March 1863 that such an association be set up and ammunition provided for practice, but still nothing was done. Finally, a provisional rifle association committee, which included the Commander of the Volunteers’ Southern Division, Lieutenant Colonel Francis Rawdon Chesney, was formed at a 12 October 1863 meeting.102 It adopted ‘a few of the most useful’ rules of the VRA and asked the Governor to preside over a general meeting. This meeting formally inaugurating the Tasmanian Rifle Association (TRA) was held on 9 March 1864.
The Tasmanian Governor became patron of the TRA Council and the Commander of Volunteers, Colonel Edward Hungerford Eagar, was elected as its president.103 A Member of Parliament, Thomas Chapman, was made vice-president.104 In an unrelated action, Chapman was soon after declared bankrupt, but went on to become Treasurer of Tasmania three times and president of Tasmania’s Executive Council. He was later described as ‘one of the ablest politicians in the colony's history.’ 105 The TRA secretary was David Lewis, a Volunteer officer from the 2nd Tasmanian Rifles. He had recently joined Parliament and was later to serve as the Tasmanian
101 For example, see the Mercury, 27 October 1863, p. 2. 102 A.J. Kilsby, ‘Francis Rawdon Chesney, RE’, Soldiers of the Queen, Issue 143, December 2010, pp. 3-6. Also see the Mercury, 2 September 1867, p. 2 and 27 January 1908, p. 2. 103 Eagar’s military career began in 1839 with the 40th of Foot. He saw active service (and was wounded) in Afghanistan. He then saw active service in Crimea and then helped to set up the Volunteers in Britain. He came to Tasmania as Assistant Adjutant in 1861 and took troops to New Zealand in 1863. He was promoted Lieutenant-Colonel in 1866. He died in England in 1871. Mercury, 3 October 1871, p. 3. 104 Mercury, 11 March 1864, p. 4. 105 F.C. Green, 'Chapman, Thomas Daniel (1815 - 1884)', Australian Dictionary of Biography, Vol.3, Melbourne University Press, 1969, pp. 383-384. 22
Government’s Treasurer.106 The TRA treasurer was one Alfred Kennerley, like Lewis a former mayor of Hobart, elected to parliament in 1865 and later to become Premier of the colony.107 Volunteer officers, most from the 1st Tasmanian Rifles, made up the remainder of the original TRA council members. So although small, the new TRA Council was influential. These were men who knew how do get things done, but they were soon beset with serious challenges.
The first concern of the new TRA was to develop a suitable range. With Government support they developed a range of 600 yards along the Esplanade at Cornelian Bay, right on the foreshore of Hobart. It opened for business on 7 May 1864, but a gale washed away the target platform and targets in July.108 Even though they were replaced, the TRA did not then have sufficient funds to arrange an annual meeting. It also had to contend with suspicion from Volunteers who saw the TRA as a direct threat to their own well-established annual championship rifle matches. It helped that Lewis was an excellent shot and actually won the Champion Gold medal in the annual Volunteer matches held in early February 1865, while two other members of the TRA took out the 1st and 2nd prizes in each class of the firing.
The TRA finally held its first very modest two match meeting over the Easter period in April 1865. The first match, for Volunteers, was shot with the standard Enfield muzzle-loader, and the second was for all-comers, with ‘any rifle’. Only 13 entries were made for the second match. It was won by civilians in 1st and 2nd place, using a variety of rifles and carbines.109 Despite the greater range of these privately owned match rifles, range safety limitations seem to have been put aside. Nonetheless, the TRA was underway, but its future seemed uncertain all the same. By the end of 1865 the number of enrolled Volunteers had declined to only 598; by December 1866 to only 421.
106
A Royal Commission was appointed in 1867 to inquire into the condition of the Tasmanian Volunteer Force. Even the artillery corps received no financial provision in the Vote of 1870.110
The Governor, Colonel (later Sir) Thomas Gore Browne, who wore a bravery award from active service in Afghanistan, was a member of the rifle association. As an old soldier he enjoyed joining in practice at the Cornelian Bay Range. His influential patronage of the association was missed after his departure in late 1868, and the TRA declined rapidly once again after low levels of government support and Volunteer antipathy.111 No annual matches appeared to have been fired in 1868. After a small match in January 1869 the TRA simply faded away, although some individual country rifle clubs at Bothwell, Clarence, Derwent, Hamilton and Sorell continued to operate. In late 1871 the Government of the day, to save money in the face of the withdrawal of the last British Army garrison, decided that it was better not to have a Volunteer force at all than an ineffective one, and so disbanded the Volunteers altogether. With the demise of the Volunteers went any chance that the TRA might endure, especially as there were hardly any civilian rifle clubs to take up where the Volunteers had left off. The TRA, after all, had been formed to support the Volunteers.
In Western Australia, a population of just over 3,000 free men over the age of 15 in 1861 with most residing in the Perth and Fremantle districts, was barely enough to keep a few small units of Volunteers in being, let alone support a rifle association. This number included aged, sick, maimed, unwilling, undesirable, and those whose occupation precluded enrolment.112 Nonetheless, an ‘Ordinance to Organize and Establish a Volunteer Military Force in Western Australia’ was promulgated in 1861 and some early Volunteer units were subsequently formed. Perth and Fremantle Volunteer units were formed in 1862 of about 100 men each and in 1862 a cavalry troop
110 Anon., A Lion in the Colony: An Historical Outline of the Tasmanian Colonial Volunteer Forces 1859-1901, Anglesea Barracks Hobart: 6th Military District Museum, Hobart, 1990, p. 18. 111 Most entries and therefore most income for TRA competition matches came from Volunteers. 112 G.F. Wieck, The Volunteer Movement in Western Australia 1861-1903, Paterson Brokensha Pty. Ltd., Perth, 1966, p. 9. 24
of just 17 men also came into being.113 The last regular British soldiers left Western Australia for Hobart in 1863, with only ‘Pensioner Guards’ (recruited to guard convicts) remaining to man the ‘Imperial’ garrison with thin support from Volunteers.
The Western Australian Volunteers nonetheless held musketry practice on the Mt. Eliza range from September 1863:
The day of the inaugural shoot was treated as a holiday by Perth residents. Storekeepers suspended business for the day, the bank was closed and Government employees connected with the Volunteer Force were given leave. Few were prevented from responding to the bugle when it sounded the assembly at 10 a.m.114
A public holiday was also declared when the Fremantle range was opened for its first match in the same year.115
By early 1869, when British garrison troops finally left the colony, once again Pensioner Guards (incentivised to stay on with gratuities, land grants and convict labour) and three Volunteer units were left to defend the colony. The arrangement broke down quickly. The two Volunteer rifle units were disbanded, one for inefficiency in early 1870 and the other for insubordination in early 1872.116 While other Volunteer units were to be formed, they remained miniscule in size and influence. It was not until 1890, when Western Australia finally achieved self-rule, that a Volunteers Metropolitan Rifle Association was formed. It was more than a decade after that before the Western Australian Rifle Association and the Goldfields Rifle Association were formed.
By 1870, rifle shooting was an integral part of defence preparation across the Australian colonies, despite the uncertain beginnings of the Volunteer movement in some colonies. The formation of
113 Heritage Council of Western Australia, ‘Register of Heritage Places Assessment Documentation Geraldton Drill Hall 1’,
early colonial rifle associations supported the Volunteer movement with their encouragement of musketry competitions between Volunteer units and the offer of cash and other prizes for shooting proficiency. This in turn was reinforced by ensuring that the annual prize matches were held primarily for the benefit of the Volunteers. Rifle shooting was popular and with the engagement of the civic elite in the colonies, brought with it considerable social capital. What was true of the British Volunteer was equally true of the colonial:
Prize shoots were extensively reported in the Volunteer Press and local newspapers. The annual prize-giving…was the major social occasion for any corps, again receiving extensive coverage…Probably very few joined the Force to hunt for pots, but many received some satisfaction in winning them. Rifle-shooting remained the staple attraction throughout the history of the Force.117
It was riflemen [infantry] who thus formed the backbone of the Volunteer forces, even from the early 1850s. They were cheaper than paid artillerymen, and before 1870, there appeared to be little need for anything else. Colonial governments provided some support, but barely enough to maintain Volunteer forces in the period until the British garrison forces departed Australia over 1869-70. Queensland and Tasmania even saw that departure as a good time to dispense with Volunteers altogether, while in Western Australia the Volunteer force was to remain small in size and influence. In South Australia, although there was a healthy rifle shooting tradition developing in that colony, it could not help but be affected by the changes of Government policy towards the Volunteers as well as by antipathy among the Volunteers themselves, as ‘war scares’ came and went.
NSW and Victoria developed their rifle associations in slightly different ways but essentially both were colonies in which organised rifle shooting was to become well-established in both urban and rural communities. While the Volunteer forces in both colonies remained relatively small, they comprised a wider diversity of types than in the smaller colonies. The powerful connection through the NRA in England to the Royal family guaranteed the engagement and support of all levels of
117 H. Cunningham, The Volunteer Force: A Social and Political History 1859-1908, Croon Helm, London, 1975, p. 116.
26
society in rifle shooting activities. Rifle shooting was both patriotic and popular and as a pastime continued unabated in NSW and Victoria even when Volunteer numbers waxed and waned.
Volunteers, despite their relatively small number, comprised the vast majority of shooting match entries and therefore income essential to the survival of the rifle associations. Additionally Volunteer officers also saw opportunities for both social and military status by becoming involved in the administration and management of rifle shooting. Individual Volunteers of several colonies, many of whom fired in VRA or NSWRA matches, saw active service in New Zealand, while the intercolonial shooting rivalry between Victoria and NSW underscored the attention that rifle shooting received in the press.
Across the colonies, the control by Volunteer officers of organised rifle shooting would become enhanced in the 1870s and continued through to the mid-1880s and beyond. The roles of the colonial rifle associations in nurturing and encouraging rifle shooting among the Volunteers would also grow, although in the first period of establishment only the two largest colonies prospered in that regard—and even the VRA faced challenges to its survival. At the beginning of organised rifle shooting there were different types of muskets and then rifles in use in different colonies, leading to idiosyncratic rules and regulations. The early intercolonial matches however, were important catalysts for regulating a range of matters, despite disagreements, concerning rifles, ranges, targets, marking and sights. Once military rifles became predominant in the intercolonial matches, the influence of the military in this regard also began to gain influence over the shape, scale and culture of organised rifle shooting in a much more direct way.
So the period to 1870 was characterized by the prominence of the Volunteer Forces as the mainstay of local defence rifle shooting, as conducted under the auspices of the colonial rifle associations. The growing influence of those associations, despite their inconsistent development and growth, was underscored by the involvement in them by social and political elite. By 1870, some civilian rifle clubs existed, but they were rare and were kept at arms-length by the rifle associations. With the
27
departure of the British Imperial garrisons in 1870, however, a new era in colonial self-defence was about to begin, in which the rifle shooting fraternity was to play a prominent part.
28
Chapter 2
Sowing the seeds of contradiction 1871-1888
This chapter will consider the developments of rifle shooting in the various colonies over the period 1871 to 1888. It was a very important period for a range of reasons, not least because of the transition from largely Volunteer soldiering to largely partly-paid Militia soldiering, which in turn saw a more serious approach to the defence of the colonies than had been seen before. The developments in these years also exacerbated differences between the way that the rifle associations in each colony developed. Differences began to become evident in part caused by a number of factors at play. These included the amount of influence over them (or not) by the local military establishment, the attitude of the rifle associations and the military establishment to civilian rifle clubs, the amount off government support they were receiving, and the technical developments within rifle shooting itself.
This chapter will also examine how, in the period between 1871 and 1888, the colonial rifle associations began to develop different characteristics from one another. It will also explain why, in the context of the slow but steady professionalization of Defence structures in the colonies especially after 1885, a basic contradiction was planted between the rifle shooting fraternity (represented by the colonial rifle associations and controlled by Volunteer or ex- Volunteer officers) and the professional military commandants and their key staff, who saw the need for riflemen who could both shoot and manoeuvre on the battlefield.
1
In NSW, by 1871 the NSWRA General Committee of 28 members contained no less than 22 Volunteer officers. 118 The annual matches at the NSWRA’s new Paddington range in November of that year saw 820 competitors compete in 23 matches—all Volunteers.119 With only some of the Volunteers armed with the Alexander-Henry breech loading rifle, there remained a good variety of rifles in use, but the safety limitations of Sydney’s main rifle range at Paddington were already being exposed by the new service rifle. As rifle technology improved, so did the range and penetrating power of their projectiles. That year almost £750in prizes was distributed in front of about 1,200 Volunteers and ‘an immense number of citizens’. 120
In 1870 the state of the Volunteer force in NSW was reasonably healthy. There were 3,247 men on the books by 1870, and numbers expanded further to 3,691 by the end of 1871.121 The increase in enrolments can be partially attributed to the Land Grants Act, which gave land in return for Volunteer service. But perhaps just as important was the great interest in the sport of rifle shooting in the Victorian age. Being a member of a Volunteer unit gave a man a chance to involve himself in competition and regular rifle practice at Government expense. Also, the Franco-Prussian War in Europe excited much military enthusiasm, swept along by articles in the Sydney Morning Herald which proclaimed the benefits of the universal military training.122 Nonetheless, the NSW government introduced partial pay to Volunteers from 1874.
118 NSW Rifle Association Report for the year ended 31 December 1871, Thomas Richards, Gov’t Printer, Sydney, 1872, p. 4. 119 NSW Rifle Association Report for the year ended 31 December 1871, Thomas Richards, Gov’t Printer, Sydney, 1872, p. 5. 120 NSW Rifle Association Report for the year ended 31 December 1871, Thomas Richards, Gov’t Printer, Sydney, 1872, pp. 9 and p. 61. 121 N. Meaney, The Search for Security in the Pacific 1901-1914, Sydney University Press, Sydney, 2009, p. 279. 122 D.W. Eyland, ‘The New South Wales Military Forces 1780-1890: Social Composition and Status’, BA Honours Thesis, University College, Australian Defence Force Academy, University of New South Wales, 1992, p. 8. 2
Naturally the NSW rifle association benefited from this expansion. When, however, the government ran low on funds by December 1876 and disallowed further recruiting into the Volunteer Force, the number of Volunteer entries for the association’s annual prize meeting decreased accordingly.123 There was little doubt that the Volunteers, by virtue of the fact that they were unpaid, varied greatly in quality. The majority were little more than rifle clubs which paid scant attention to the pipe clay and polish aspects of colonial soldiering.124 This decline in the Volunteer movement however, had direct social ramifications. Given the direct and important social connections established between the Volunteer movement (sanctioned by Queen Victoria herself), and the ‘establishment’ figures in each colony, it was a social disaster for the supporting rifle associations to be facing decline. By 1878, the situation with Volunteer numbers was so poor that the NSWRA council ‘having previously ascertained the opinion of the Commandant on the matter—did not think it desirable to have a public presentation of the prizes won at the annual prize meeting. Arrangements were accordingly made to pay over the prizes privately.’125 NSW Volunteers were virtually disbanded in 1879 and the NSWRA ‘went through a very trying time for two or three years’.126 At least public prize-giving for rifle shooting was once again enacted by the patron of the NSWRA, Governor Sir Augustus Loftus. In a speech to the assembled Volunteers he said:
I would observe that however valuable may be the proficiency of a good marksman, the emulation to become so should not entirely absorb his time and attention, and thereby interfere with the performance of the duties of acquiring drill, professional drill. I consider that the one is as important as the other, and none can be more important for the soldier than that of efficiency at drill. I trust therefore that in seeking to acquire
123 Report of the New South Wales Rifle Association for the year ended 31 December 1876’, Charles Potter, Govt. Printer, Sydney, 1877, p. 6. 124 D.W. Eyland, ‘The New South Wales Military Forces 1780-1890: Social Composition and Status’, BA Honours Thesis, University of New South Wales, 1992, p. 42. 125 Report of the New South Wales Rifle Association for the year ended 31December 1878’, Charles Potter, Govt. Printer, Sydney, 1879, p. 10. 126 ‘Illustrated Sydney News, 6 March 1890’, in Report of the New South Wales Rifle Association 1889, Charles Potter, Govt. Printer, Sydney, 1890, p. 76. 3
perfection as riflemen you will not neglect the other more important duties of perfection at drill. 127
In these sentiments, Loftus echoed the thoughts of many an Imperial officer in the Australian colonies. The rifle associations were not insensitive to such comments but did not directly influence, despite the preponderance of Volunteer officers on their councils, whether Volunteer units per se drilled, or by how much. What associations could do is introduce even more matches which fell under the title of ‘service’ matches. In 1880 for example, the NSWRA brought in a ‘skirmishing match’, which was popular for some years, but target shooting for cash prizes remained the mainstay of the annual prize meetings.128 Eventually the government began to loan the newer military-issued rifles for the Volunteers to the rifle association for its matches. The loan of 50 Alexander-Henry rifles being made available for the first time for practice and later in competition in the 1883 annual prize meeting enabled many civilian members to take part in that meeting and entries created a record.129
In Victoria, the new, eight member VRA Council of 1870, was determined to arrest the apparent decline in fortunes of that association, and held 23 meetings in the eight months to February 1871. It wrote:
Since February 1867 there seems not to have been any Council meetings, or really any members of the Association from which to form a Council, and, with the exception of the meeting in December 1869 …no prize, meetings have been held since that time. …the taste for practicing with the rifle had evidently fallen off greatly during the recess, and the Sandridge butts had fallen greatly into disrepair. The property also, of the Association had in great measure been lost sight of, no record having been found in any books which the Council have come into possession of.130
127 Report of the New South Wales Rifle Association for the year ended 31December 1879’, Thomas Richards, Govt. Printer, Sydney, 1880, p. 50. 128 C.H. Cromack, The History of the National Rifle Association of New South Wales,1860-1956, p. 16. 129 This is the first mention of loan records by the Government. C.H. Cromack, The History of the National Rifle Association of New South Wales,1860-1956, p. 18. 130 Report of the Council of the Victorian Rifle Association for the eight months ending on 28 February 1871, John Ferres, Govt. Printer, Melbourne, 1871, p. 9 and Argus, 1 March 1871, p. 7. 4
As in NSW, the VRA council to 1888 was comprised almost entirely of Volunteer officers. The Governor became patron and the Commandant of Military and Naval Forces in Victoria, Colonel William Acland Douglas Anderson, was its ex officio president. Although civilian rifle clubs competing in association prize meetings remained rare even into the 1880s, their presence was to shape the character of the two associations. Victoria’s rifle shooting ‘community’ developed a strong character of independence from the military, even equality with the military; this was driven by the civilian and Volunteer elements in the VRA and in clubs. In 1876 a motion was made to the VRA’s annual general meeting—‘That all Commanding Officers of Corps, being members of the Association, shall be ex officio members of the Council.’ The motion was lost by a large majority, as a rejection of having too much military influence on the council.131 The NSWRA however, remained strongly pro-military, a characteristic reinforced by its rejection of civilian rifle clubs participating in its prize meetings. NSW strictly applied its tenet that the rifle association existed to support Volunteer musketry practice with military firearms, while Victoria took a more holistic approach, later, from 1883, reinforced even more formally. NSW remained under the thrall of its British Imperial staff officers and the differences in the approach of the two colonies would be played out in various disagreements between them over rifle shooting issues as the years progressed.
The Victorian Government, faced with severe budget constraints, cancelled Easter Camps for the Volunteers during the period 1874-76—during which time a Government commission looked into the whole Volunteer movement in Victoria—and between 1879 to 1881.132
131 Argus, 19 February 1876, p. 5. Office bearers that year show the influence of the Volunteers and politicians as well - vice presidents, Major W. C. Smith MLA (Ballarat Rifles), Major Sargood MLC (St. Kilda Artillery), hon. treasurer, Major Irving (staff), hon. secretary, Captain Blannin (Collingwood Rifles), ordinary members of council, Captain Wardill (East Melbourne Artillery), Captain King (EMA), Lieutenant Christopherson (East Collingwood Rifles); Mr. Chessell (Emerald Hill Artillery), Sergeant Major Whalley (SKA), and Mr. Powell (Southern Rifles); Country members - Captain Greenfield (1st Ballarat Rifles), Geelong district, Lieutenant Colonel Rede (staff), Mount Alexander district, Mr. V. Mann (2nd Castlemaine Rifles). 132 Colonel Sir W.F.D. Jervois and Lieutenant-Colonel P.H. Scratchley, RE, began reviews of colonial defences for the various colonial governments from 1877. By the time Scratchley completed the work in 1882, there was growing unanimity around the need to replace the Volunteer system with Militia. R.W. Winks, 'Jervois, Sir William Francis Drummond (1821–1897)', Australian Dictionary of Biography, National Centre of 5
However, the possibility of another war between Britain and Russia, provided some sorely needed stimulus to the Volunteer Force in the colony, and the Government responded by slightly increasing unit establishment strengths.133 In 1882, however, ‘grandiose plans for the doubling of the infantry force in Victoria were soon scrapped due to the financial problems within the Colony. The economic depression caused the introduction of further restrictions the following year’.134
This continued feast and famine approach to defence in Victoria (and in other colonies), led the colony to create a new portfolio—Minister for Defence. Major Frederick T. Sargood, MLC, a member of the volunteer artillery since 1866, was appointed Minister; he recommended to the Government that the Volunteer Force should be disbanded and replaced with a part-time paid Militia.135 Among other innovations to follow were the creation of a Council of Defence and Defence Department in Victoria, a first among the colonies.136 Sargood was also a strong supporter of rifle shooting and so for the first time, rifle clubs were placed on a statutory basis as well:
Rifle clubs were established in 1883 for the encouragement of rifle practice. Members were allowed to obtain rifles and ammunition at reduced rates, and were given free railway travelling for rifle practice and matches. Shortly after inauguration, the clubs were divided into six districts, and members in each district were required to meet once a quarter for practice in field firing. An annual allowance was made to the clubs for each effective marksman, the money being devoted to the maintenance of ranges and purchase of ammunition.137
Biography, Australian National University,
Meanwhile in South Australia, a robust reserve system developed well before that of Victoria, although Victoria had the resources in the end to take defence developments to their logical conclusion with the creation of a Defence Department headed by a Minister for Defence. In fact it was the South Australian system, as it emerged after 1878, which British Army engineer and advisor on colonial defences Lieutenant-Colonel Peter Henry Scratchley saw as a possible ideal for other colonies as well.138 To that end it is worth looking at it in detail. In South Australia, with the departure of its redcoats in 1870, its Governor stated:
In future the colonies will have to look to their own defence; and, as far as South Australia is concerned, the feeling is to have a militia, though it is probable that, with a little judicious assistance on the part of the authorities, a large number of rifle clubs, that would embrace all the old volunteers, might be established throughout the length and breadth of the land. There is already a movement abroad in this direction, and the existing Country Rifle Association, both in their management and in their excellence in shooting, reflect the highest credit upon those who form them.139
The Commandant of the South Australian military forces, Lieutenant-Colonel Major Francis Downes, Royal Artillery, who arrived in 1877, was exasperated time and again by South Australia’s Rifle Volunteer Force (RVF). Not only did it vary greatly in strength and in military efficiency, it also consisted of the more well-to-do citizens of the colony rather than a more representative cross-section. ‘For them soldiering was mainly a sport, rifle shooting and a venue for social activities. They wielded considerable political clout and made the life of the commandant, a permanent officer, a misery.’140 Downes urged the Government to bring these country rifle volunteers under some form of military control. His scheme was simple:
138 ‘This movement, which stands outside of the Volunteer organization of [SA], has so far been a great success. …I must confess a very strong leaning towards the idea…If regular paid forces, with proper reserves available in time of war, are maintained, I am not prepared to say that the [SA] defence organization may not prove in the long run to be that best suited to the requirements of the Australian Colonies.’ Scratchley, P. H., Australian Defences and New Guinea, Elibron Classics (2005), an unabridged facsimile of the edition published by MacMillan and Co., London and New York, 1887, pp. 125-127. 139 Illustrated Australian News for Home Readers, 10 September 1870, p. 158. 140 H.J. Zwillenberg, ‘The Defence of South Australia 1836-1901’, Sabretache, Vol.26, April-June 1985, pp. 18 and W. Perry, 'Downes, Major Francis (1834–1923)', Australian Dictionary of Biography, National Centre of Biography, Australian National University,
In return for attendance at ten drills annually and an obligation to serve with the forces when called out by the governor, members of rifle corps received the loan of a government rifle and free ammunition. The rifle companies elected their own officers, paid for their own uniforms, and were administered by a South Australian National Rifle Association. 141
In addition, drill was to be carried out at least once per fortnight and members who missed quarterly meetings or drill without reasonable excuse for a period of six weeks would be struck off the roll of the Corps. An annual shooting match was also to be held.142
To this end, the Rifle Companies Act of 1878 ‘both recognised and exploited the popular sport of rifle shooting, and for the first time there was a rush to join the new units by men who wished to partake of this sport at government expense.’143 Where did this leave SARA? In 1878 SARA, which had been agitating for a more efficient military force, found its members deserting to join the very force it had recommended. For from the Rifle Companies Act 1878 was formed the South Australian National Rifle Association (SANRA), to coordinate the new rifle companies (‘rifle clubs’) of the RVF. The first SANRA Council, elected in a special meeting of delegates from those 16 rifle companies, was a very different sort of council to the original SARA Committee of 1860. The new SANRA council was composed entirely of Volunteer officers with Downes as Inspecting Officer, that is, as de facto president of SANRA.144
In its first report, the SANRA Council stated that ‘The object of the [SANRA] …[was] to organize Rifle Companies, to encourage their formation and to establish an Auxiliary Defence
141 S.J. Clarke, ‘Marching to Their Own Drum: British Officers as Military Commandants in the Australian Colonies and New Zealand 1870-1901’, PhD Thesis, University of New South Wales, 1999, p. 94. 142 F. Garie, ‘The South Australian Free Rifles’, p. 24. 143 L. Wilkins, ‘The Bated Shining Sword: The Colonial Defence Force as a Mirror of Colonial Society in South Australia 1836-1901, pp. 49-50. 144 SARA continued to exist and limped on until at least 1882 but mostly represented by the members of the South Australian Rifle Club (SARC) - one of whom was Allan McFarlane, the first Australian colonial to shoot at Wimbledon. As in SARA, SARC included a number of members who also belonged to the government forces, and who no doubt shot their government Martinis. F. Garie, F., ‘A Brief History of SARA to 1900’, unpub., dated 17 February 2002, provided to author by Frank Garie 6 March 2010, npn. 8
Force to aid in defence of the Province [South Australia] in time of need.’145 The SANRA conducted its first matches at a new range at Glanville near Semaphore, near the sea, in early October 1879. 85 members entered for the seven matches. The final event was a match between SANRA members (the unpaid rifle volunteers or RVF) and members of the Local Volunteer Military Force (LVMF—the partially paid Volunteer Force), with prizes distributed by the Governor a week later. By the end of 1880, there were twenty-nine companies in SANRA, and their strength consisted of 813 commissioned and non-commissioned officers and men, an increase by 246 on the previous year.146
The new SANRA/RVF company arrangements were not an unqualified success. It seemed that social standing and comradeship around friendly shooting matches remained an important aspect of members’ motivation to turn up. Even though units were paid a capitation allowance for the number of men who turned up for drill, enforcing the need to drill was another matter entirely: The explicit division of the volunteer force into a military and an auxiliary component had serious consequences. It led to confusion, half measures and the downfall of two commandants who tried, genuinely, to turn the rifle clubs into something resembling a military force by strengthening the military control. This was always strenuously and, until 1895, successfully resisted, possible because of the electoral influence these very many and often quite small bodies were able to exert.147
In January 1881 Downes made the first of several scathing reports on progress:
In the Companies formed in 1879 the average shooting may be better; but with few exceptions there has been no progress in discipline and drill. Some Companies have decidedly retrograded; others that were bad in 1879 have not improved…. if called out at all, they would be employed either as a baggage guard or in defence of some unoccupied post where a man would simply be required to shoot…
145 South Australian National Rifle Association: First Annual Report 1879, Advertiser and Chronicle Steam Printing Office, Adelaide, 1880, p. 9. 146 South Australian National Rifle Association: 2nd Annual Report 1880 [incorporating Annual Return of Rifle Companies 31 December 1880 and Inspecting Officer’s Report 31 December 1880], J. Williams, Adelaide, 1881, p. 7 and the Maitland Mercury & Hunter River General Advertiser, 24 February 1881, p. 3. 147 H.J. Zwillenberg, ‘Citizens and Soldiers: The Defence of South Australia 1836-1901’, p. 204. 9
…in several instances officers accept the position, assume the rank, and appear to be perfectly indifferent to further duties or responsibilities other than amusing themselves at rifle shooting. Until such officers are weeded out the S.A.N.R. Association cannot take that position as a strength and support to the country which is expected of it, and which the great majority of its members are anxious it should become. 148
Downes was a Crimean veteran and perhaps his expectations were too high, as the RVF rifle companies were, after all, rifle clubs in disguise, and their members were not all that keen on drill.149 When the Palmerston [Darwin] Rifle Club appealed to Downes for the provision of iron targets in 1883, Downes provided the targets. But in an effort to force the rifle club into a more soldier-like stance, Downes refused to send ammunition at the Government price, insisting that it consider becoming a SANRA/RVF company to enable it to receive such supplies (it never did, as there were not enough members; only 11 turned up for its Annual General meeting in February 1884).150 In addition, Downes continued to be frustrated by his lack of control over the RVF. The RVF ‘had an appreciable amount of political influence. Most of the members of the RVF were, by virtue of their better social status, electors of the Upper House and any complaints the commandant, in his capacity of inspecting officer, submitted to the chief secretary, himself a member of the upper house, rarely brought forth any comments other than the file endorsement “seen”.151
Nonetheless, ‘as a sporting organization [SANRA] the movement was very popular indeed, and received more encouragement than the paid or unpaid volunteers; …in 1880, news reports on rifle shooting exceeded in number those relating to cricket.’ The movement was particularly strong in the country areas while its strength in the metropolitan area came from the civil service companies and the military rifle clubs.152 By 1882, changes had to be made in
148 South Australian National Rifle Association: 2nd Annual Report 1880 [incorporating Annual Return of Rifle Companies 31 December 1880 and Inspecting Officer’s Report 31 December 1880], J. Williams, Adelaide, 1881, p. 11. 149 Downes twice served as Commandant in South Australia, served in Victoria in between those appointments and was part of several official defence inquiries in NSW and elsewhere. See
South Australia. The clumsily named ‘Local Forces Acts Further Amendment Act, 1882’ strengthened executive military control. The Governor, for example, now had the right to appoint the field officers of the RVF, previously appointed by the SANRA council subject to the Governor’s approval only, and the RVF was to be placed under the command of the military commandant, South Australian Military Forces.153 In effect, SANRA became the RVF, and its members began to attend field manoeuvres of the reorganized Volunteer military force.
The South Australian experience showed commandants, if they cared to notice, that managing Volunteers and the interface between Volunteers and rifle clubs, was no easy task. At the same time, however, if the Government could support change, it was possible to develop an auxiliary force of riflemen out of the colonial rifle associations and clubs which could support the main military forces. However, while Downes now had the RVF under his command he still did not possess the power to disband the corps. ‘Nor did the commandant’s headaches end there because the problem with Downes’ militarization of the rifle clubs was that it created rivalry between the paid and unpaid volunteer branches.’154 When Downes moved to Victoria in 1885, he was to be critical of some aspects of the very model he had created.
Much further north, Queensland took another path again. In 1870, attempts to reconstitute the failed Queensland Rifle Association (QRA) were to no avail. It was not until 1877 that a new QRA was formed and annual matches were resuscitated. The same faces appeared once again as had been there in 1861. On 1 October 1877 at a general meeting of the association, the now Sir Maurice O’Connell took the chair and business got underway.155
153 ibid., p. 207 and H.J. Scott, (comp), South Australia in 1887 - A Handbook for the Adelaide Jubilee International Exhibition, E. Spiller, Govt. Printer, Adelaide, 1887, p. 131. 154 S.J. Clarke, ‘Marching to Their Own Drum: British Officers as Military Commandants in the Australian Colonies and New Zealand 1870-1901’, p. 95. 155 Sir Maurice O’Connell was Administrator for the Colony in 1876-77. See B. Casey, Home on the Range - Queensland Rifle Association 1861-2011, Boolarong Press, Brisbane, 2011, pp. 23-24. 11
A provisional QRA committee had been successful in regaining the use of Victoria Park as a rifle range and even induced the Premier to put forward, through the estimates, £600 to refurbish the range. The elected council (as it was now called) for the next year, then agreed to approach the Premier for a further £100 for prizes, which the Government subsequently agreed to do.
The first matches of the new QRA were held at the refurbished Volunteer range in Brisbane over 20-24 August 1878.156 Now adopting the rules of the NSWRA, the QRA set out an ambitious 12 match programme, where the Volunteers fired the standard Government- issue Snider rifles using ‘the Hythe position’ (a prescribed British Army position—standing for 200-300 yards, kneeling for 500-600 yards, and any position for ranges beyond 600 yards— including the ‘back’ position).157 All in all it was a more auspicious start to the QRA than its first attempt in the 1860s. Meanwhile, a new Volunteer force was enlisted under the Volunteer Act of 1878, as the government had finally begun to get serious about the colony’s defences, following the presentation to Parliament of a report by the British Army expert, Sir William Drummond Jervois, who had been asked to survey the defences of Australia and New Zealand. 158
It was not until 1883, however, that the Queensland Government decided that it had the money to appoint an Imperial officer of some standing to command its Volunteer Force, which by then numbered about 1,200 men. Major George Arthur French, Royal Artillery,
156 Courier, 3 August 1878, p. 1. 157 The ‘right’ to use ‘any position’, including the anatomically challenging back position (where the rifleman lay on his back and fired at the target with the rifle aimed over his extended legs), rather than just the positions mandated by the British Army’s Small Arms School at Hythe in England, led to many disagreements between associations during this period of development of basic rules and regulations for rifle clubs and associations. 158 Courier, 2 October, 1877, p. 3 and A.T. Jackson, Southern Queensland Rifle Association Jubilee, 1877-1927: a brief History of the Association during the past Fifty Years, p. 6. For Jervois, see R.W. Winks, 'Jervois, Sir William Francis Drummond (1821–1897)'. 12
received the appointment with the local rank of Colonel.159 French, who would form very definite views about the efficacy of rifle associations, was not impressed with the Queensland Volunteers, mainly because, like Downes in South Australia, he could not control them. The Queensland Government subsequently decided to establish a more definite military body, and passed the Defence Act of 1884. Under this Act a force was formed consisting of a small permanent force, a Militia and Volunteers (including rifle clubs).160
In the small island colony of Tasmania, officially sanctioned rifle shooting collapsed in late 1871. The Government of the day, to save money, disbanded the Volunteers altogether and so the nascent TRA disappeared. However, on 19 December 1876 a new rifle association, the Southern Tasmanian Rifle Association (STRA), was formed, with 35 members.161 By 1880 the STRA had 100 members of which 44 were Volunteers. With the resurgence of the Volunteer movement in Tasmania from 1871 and a new rifle range at Sandy Bay in Hobart, the future for the STRA looked bright.162 From the military viewpoint however, the Imperial defence expert, Scratchley, employed to report on several colonial defence organisations for their Governments, also noted in a speech in Hobart in late 1878:
There is a tendency in Australia to disregard the necessity for [this] thorough drilling of the men. I know that many persons consider that good shooting is about all that is necessary for a volunteer, because he will generally be required to act only on the defensive. …A local force will be of little value for defence unless the men are capable of acting well together on the offensive at the right moment. I lay the greatest stress upon the men being rendered through marksmen…but I must lay equal stress upon the
159 R. Sutton, 'French, Sir George Arthur (1841–1921)', Australian Dictionary of Biography, National Centre of Biography, Australian National University,
necessity for both officers and men making themselves proficient with the groundwork of their drill…163
From 1880-82 inquiries were conducted into the Tasmanian Volunteer Force (TVF). A select committee resulted in a reorganization of the TVF in 1880. Then a Royal Commission was instigated by Sir George Strahan, the Tasmanian governor and commander-in-chief of Tasmania in September 1882, which resulted in a paid Militia being formed.164
On the other side of the continent, in the sparsely populated colony of Western Australia, all that was left in a military sense after the departure of the British Imperial garrison in 1870 were the Fremantle Corps of Volunteers (disbanded for inefficiency in February 1870) and the Perth Corps of Volunteers (disbanded for insubordination in February 1872). But Volunteer corps were reactivated in late 1872 with improved conditions of ‘enlistment, service, discipline and command’. By 1878 there were Volunteer corps in Perth, Fremantle, Guildford, Geraldton, Albany, York and Bunbury. These ‘corps’ were relatively small—often less than 100 men—and administratively independent.165 No rifle association was formed; the colony struggled just to fill the ranks of its Volunteer corps. These corps were very similar in nature and characteristics to the early Volunteer units in Victoria 20 years before—social and amateurish.
Across all of the Australian colonies between 1871 and 1883 there was a gestation of the thinking and plans resulting from a series of military and defence reviews (principally those of Scratchley as previously noted). But other events were also in play which helped to accelerate the popularity of rifle shooting by patriots and further develop the close relationship between
163 P.H. Scratchley, Address by Colonel Scratchley R.E., on the occasion of an Inspection of the Volunteer Force at Hobart Town by His Excellency the Governor and Commander-in-Chief December 2nd, 1878, Mercury Steam Press, Hobart 1878, p. 13. 164 D.M. Wyatt, A Lion in the Colony: An Historical Outline of the Tasmanian Colonial Volunteer Forces 1859-1901, p. 25. 165 Heritage Council of Western Australia ‘Register of Heritage Places Assessment Documentation Geraldton Drill Hall 1’. 14
rifle associations and Volunteers. In 1876, for example, an intercolonial team was sent to shoot in England and America, creating a real sense of common purpose among riflemen.166 The team, from Victoria and NSW, were all Volunteers. The Victorians fired matches at Wimbledon in England before travelling to the United States, where they met up with the less financially robust NSW contingent to shoot in the so-called Palma match at Creedmoor in New York State.167 This visit received widespread newspaper coverage in the Australian press, and helped to further broaden the appeal of rifle shooting among the population at large and encourage public pride in ‘Australian’ achievements abroad.
It must be remembered that in 1875, there was still no uniform set of shooting rules for the clubs and associations of Australia. Even the Volunteers in each colony, while in general following musketry practices laid down by British Army regulations, did not always do so given that the colonies used a wide variety of arms on issue. For instance, in 1879 the Queensland and Western Australian Volunteers used the Snider rifle, South Australia and Victoria were issued with the Martini-Henry while NSW Volunteers were armed with the Alexander- Henry.168 The future dominance of the Martini-Henry rifle, however, was evident as early as 1870, when a demonstration match for rapid firing in NSW ‘created much interest, in which the Martini-Henry and Snider breech-loaders were pitted against each other. The first–named rifle obtained 113 points in three minutes.’169
The wider introduction of the Martini-Henry rifle into colonial rifle associations began with its use in the VRA in 1876; 200 rifles were issued. It gradually became the rifle of choice despite the fact that it was not formally introduced to the NSW Volunteer force until 1885,
166 The trip was related in A. Blannin, Hasty notes of a flying trip with the Victorian Rifle Team to England and America in 1876, A. Blannin, Melbourne, 1877. 167 The records of this match are contained in C.C.C. Chesire, The History and Records of the Palma Match (The World Long Range Rifle Team Championships), Oxonian Rewley Press, Oxford, 1992. 168 J.E. Corcoran, The Target Rifle in Australia, 1860-1900, p. 141. 169 Report of the New South Wales Rifle Association for the year ended 31 December 1870’, Thomas Richards, Govt. Printer, Sydney, 1871, p. 6. 15
although riflemen in that colony had privately bought their own Martini-Henry rifles for some years. By 1875, the NSW team abandoned their older rifles and used the Martini-Henry rifles offered by the Victorian hosts that year and the ‘shooting exceeded all expectations. The subject of obtaining the [Martini-Henry] rifles for subsequent Intercolonial Military Matches has occupied the attention of the [NSW] Council.’ 170 A further fillip to rifle shooting was the introduction of highly regarded individual championship matches common to all the colonies, called the Queen’s Prize.171
One factor which accelerated the introduction of the Martini-Henry rifle into the NSWRA were the intercolonial rifle matches. These began again in 1873 between Victoria and NSW using large-bore (i.e., greater than .577-inch) rifles; in effect, military rifles.172 The series through to 1883 was dominated by disputes over the rules—over sights, positions, types of rifles to be used and so on—but culminated with the Martini-Henry generally becoming dominant. This in turn affected range construction and safety, forcing associations to move their home ranges, often because the bullets were flying into civilian areas, upsetting local residents and their stock alike. The various colonial rifle associations from this point started to settle into permanent homes—for example, in 1878 the VRA moved to its new Williamstown rifle range, where it would stay for another 110 years, after being evicted from Emerald Hill and Sandridge metropolitan ranges in turn.
International shooting was another point of stimulus for the colonial rifle associations in this period. These included competitions against foreign naval vessels which visited colonial ports. For example in 1879, a three way match was held between the NSWRA and the French
170 Report of the New South Wales Rifle Association for the year ended 31 December 1875’, Thomas Richards, Govt. Printer, Sydney, 1876, p. 6. 171 The first Queen’s competitions were held in Queensland in 1878, NSW and South Australia in 1879 and 1881 in Victoria. J.M. O'Connor, Shooting awards and prize medals to Australian Military Forces 1860-2000, John O'Connor, Kingsgrove, 2002, p. 95. 172 The matches saw teams of 20 marksmen, firing 10 rounds each, at 200, 500, and 600 yards. Hay, Enfield, Snider and eventually Martini-Henry rifles were used. Report of the New South Wales Rifle Association for the year ended 31 December 1873’, Thomas Richards, Govt. Printer, Sydney, 1874, p. 50. 16
Navy ship Rhin and the Royal Navy ship on the Australia Station, HMS Wolverene. A German Navy ship in port, Danze, declined to participate.173 In 1882 the Japanese naval training ship Tsukuba visited Melbourne and Hobart: ‘a Japanese rifle team competed against a local rifle team in Hobart; the [Japanese] team lost.’ 174
Meanwhile, the first tentative discussion of Australia-wide defence matters occurred at the 1881 colonial premiers’ conference, but it took a back seat to the more important questions of the time, namely how to exclude Chinese immigration. During this period Scratchley was continuing his work as commissioner for defences and reported back to the colonies accordingly. In 1882, with Scratchley’s departure for England, he wrote:
The balance of opinion in Australia is decidedly to the effect that an unpaid Volunteer force cannot be sufficiently trained to form a reliable defence force, and that, when the numbers are small, the difficulties of maintaining discipline are greatly increased. It is admitted that good marksmen can be turned out under the unpaid system, but they will not be fit to take the field as efficient soldiers. The popular notion that Volunteers, if good marksmen, and in sufficient numbers, and well commanded, will be able to defeat an invading force, is rapidly losing ground, and is scouted by experienced and thoughtful Volunteer officers throughout the Colonies. 175
He added that ‘a popular delusion existed in Australia—and it has not entirely disappeared— that in the event of a fight the population would turn out to a man, and that the Colonies could trust for defence to bodies of riflemen, similar to the francs-tireurs in the Franco-German war.’176
173 Report of the New South Wales Rifle Association for the year ended 31December 1879’, Thomas Richards, Govt. Printer, Sydney, 1880, p. 6. 174 S. Noguchi, & A.I. Davidson, ‘The Mikado's Navy and Australia: visits of His Imperial Japanese Majesty's training ships, 1878-1912’, Working Papers in Japanese Studies No. 3, Japanese Studies Centre, Melbourne, 1993, pp. 3-12. 175 P.H. Scratchley, Australian Defences and New Guinea, Elibron Classics, New York, 2005, unabridged facsimile of the edition published by MacMillan and Co., London and New York, 1887, pp. 139-140. 176 P.H. Scratchley, Australian Defences and New Guinea, p. 119. 17
By the early 1880s then, most colonies had accepted the need for a better and more effective defence structure and had moved or were moving towards more formal defence organisations, albeit in an uncoordinated way between the colonies.177 Just as this process of transition toward national defence was underway, the war in the Sudan and the death of the popular British General Gordon in Khartoum in January 1885 galvanised public opinion and re-energised the Volunteer movement, and with it, enthusiasm for rifle shooting.178 One Victorian Volunteer officer had written in 1884:
…rifle shooting must be regarded as an infinitely superior means of recreation to football or cricket, while it has the further advantage that it may become, in time of war, one of the principal elements of national safety. 179
Now, with Gordon’s death and the outbreak of another periodic outburst of patriotism, recreation and national safety became one. This was an argument that would be used over the next 60 years to justify the expansion of rifle shooting among the general populace.
For rifle associations and clubs across the country, the South Australian experiment of the RVF was seen as a possible model for other colonies but essentially the rifle associations and clubs remained wedded to their beginnings as a movement to support Volunteers. Their leadership continued to be dominated by Volunteer or ex-Volunteer officers, and the civilian rifle clubs by ex-Volunteers who had decided against joining the new Militia forces. However, as the Militia forces expanded, and military rifle ranges and the standard Militia weapon of choice—the Martini-Henry—became more widespread, this dynamic began to change.
For the new part-time and partially-paid Militia forces, under military discipline and required to meet the drill and musketry requirements expected of them by regulations, rifle
177 Administration of defence in each colony remained separate. 178 C. Wilcox, ‘Australia’s Citizen Army 1889-1914’, p. 23. The Sudan Contingent from NSW of 800 men troops included 20 men from the NSWRA. C.H. Cromack, The History of the National Rifle Association of New South Wales, 1860-1956, p. 20. 179 J.A. Christopherson, Notes on the Formation of Rifle Clubs, John Ferres, Govt. Printer, Melbourne, 1884, p. 5. 18
shooting was still an attractive incentive to join up. They could not be deployed overseas to fight Britain’s wars so there was little risk that joining the Militia could actually end in a war- like situation. The rifle associations quickly opened up their matches and prizes to the Militia forces. Colonial government grants to the associations to manage rifle shooting and maintain some rifle ranges grew over time and ammunition was issued for free to members of the association. Momentum thus began to build after 1885 to create a union of rifle associations to manage intercolonial and international shooting.
The despatch of an all-Australian colonial rifle team to Wimbledon in 1886 to compete for the Kolapore Cup, an Empire-wide teams match, was the result of cooperation and discussion at the Sydney intercolonial rifle meeting of 1884.180 This was followed by a determination to make something of the idea of a council of rifle associations. Four colonial rifle associations nominated delegates to discuss the idea at the next intercolonial rifle match meeting, in Adelaide in 1887. At that meeting, and at the suggestion of Captain George Henry Dean of the SANRA and Major General John Fletcher Owen, the South Australian Commandant and President of SANRA, rifle associations were then invited to appoint delegates to attend the 1888 Sydney Centennial matches and discuss the formation of a council to represent the rifle associations of all the colonies.181
That this conclusion could be reached at all was the result of a range of defence developments in the various colonies. In 1881, the NSWRA changed its objectives to cater for the changes it could see looming in the defence establishment. The new objectives were stated as: ‘To encourage members of the Defence Forces of the Colony to become proficient
180 J.E. Corcoran, The Target Rifle in Australia, 1860-1900, Dolphin Press, Hunters Hill, 1975, p. 151 and Report of the New South Wales Rifle Association for the year ended 31December 1884’, Thomas Richards, Govt. Printer, Sydney, 1885. 181 H.J. Zwillenberg, 'Dean, George Henry (1859–1953)', Australian Dictionary of Biography, National Centre of Biography, Australian National University,
in the use of the weapons with which they are armed, and to promote Rifle Shooting throughout the Colony.’182 Rifle clubs and new ‘district unions’ began to expand in number throughout the colony, especially ‘regimental rifle clubs’ based on the remaining Volunteer and the new Militia units, which allowed members to participate in the rifle association matches as individuals when they were not firing in service matches on behalf of their units.
Yet the Government was criticised for supporting the associations and clubs but not providing for better practice opportunities for its Volunteers [and Militia]:
Our government … subsidises a Rifle Association and recognizes regimental clubs, and any rewards for good shooting come from these bodies, which may or may not be under competent military control, and are supported in part by the subscriptions of the men who are expected to compete for their prizes. By all means let such competitions continue, but, in the name of common sense, let them be independent of the regular regimental musketry instruction and practice. If the volunteer system has failed to secure efficiency in other respects, how can it fail to secure it in this? Scarcely one man in ten is physically capable of becoming a marksman, and not one in fifty has a reasonable chance of winning a prize in a match. There is, therefore, no inducement for the great mass of ordinary shots to voluntarily trouble themselves with practice unless it is enforced as a duty.183
By the late 1880s, press reports were popularising individual riflemen who had won prizes in overseas competitions. One of these was Lieutenant Maurice Keating, a Volunteer officer in the NSW Naval Brigade who had been with the NSW Contingent to the Sudan. A crack shot, he was a popular member of the first ‘Australian’ team to shoot at Wimbledon: ‘the Bulletin likened his relationship to shooting in Australia to that of W. G. Grace to English cricket.’184 The continuing influence of Volunteer officers in the NSWRA, such as Keating, can be seen by their presence on the Paddington rifle range committee in 1886. Of the committee of seven, three were from the Volunteer infantry, one from the Volunteer engineers, one from the Volunteer torpedo corps, one from the Volunteer artillery and only
182 Report of the New South Wales Rifle Association 1887 and Grand Centennial Matches’, Charles Potter, Govt. Printer, Sydney, 1888, p. 3. 183 J. Reed, ‘Our Volunteer System’, Sydney Quarterly, Vol.2, No.5, February 1885, p. 33. 184 J.E. Corcoran, The Target Rifle in Australia, 1860-1900, pp. 157-61. 20
one from the garrison artillery, a permanent and militia force.185 Similarly, in the 16 strong rifle team selected to represent NSW in the August 1887 intercolonial rifle match in Adelaide, all except two were Volunteers, the others from ‘staff’.186
In NSW, the rifle association was becoming stronger, not least because from 1887, civilian rifle clubs in NSW were given the same privilege as Volunteers to purchase cheap ammunition from military stocks. 187 This allowed them to practice more readily and more regularly than the military units which were prescribed by standard musketry course requirements. By January 1888 when the NSWRA rifle association hosted the Centennial rifle matches, Sydney’s Daily Telegraph noted that:
…some of the best shooting was done by the Rifle Clubs, and it was a Rifle-club man who took the highest individual prize. It is to be regretted that these excellent marksmen should not be included in some way in the military strength of the Colonies. Under certain Regulations, of no stringent nature, they might be made to form a splendid reserve force to be appealed to in an emergency. 188
Despite the growing strength of civilian clubs, it was the regimental clubs in Volunteer and Militia units which still dominated the NSWRA. Unlike in Victoria, the NSWRA and the military authorities remained unenthusiastic about the participation of civilian rifle clubs in the defence of their colony, regarding them as amateurs and certainly not as a potential resource for defence.
185 ‘G.O.56, 13 March 1886’, Brigade, Divisional and General Orders, HQ NSW Military Forces, 1886, AWM1, 13/1, pp. 45-46. In 1886 an order was issued that the Paddington Rifle Range be closed. It was considered that the shooting constituted a danger to workmen in Centennial Park, but a subsequent deputation succeeded in gaining permission for shooting on Saturday afternoons only...alteration to the stop-butts at Paddington range enabled shooting to continue there until 1890. See C.H. Cromack, The History of the National Rifle Association of New South Wales,1860-1956, pp. 21-22. 186 ‘G.O.114, 4 August 1887’, General Orders HQ NSW Military Forces 1887, AWM1, 13/2, npn. 187 ‘G.O.68, 30 March 1887’, General Orders HQ NSW Military Forces 1887, AWM1, 13/2, npn. 188 Daily Telegraph, 26 February 1888 in Report of the New South Wales Rifle Association 1887 and Grand Centennial Matches’, Charles Potter, Govt. Printer, Sydney, 1888, p. 120. 21
With these improved standards of rifle shooting, intercolonial rifle matches became highly competitive as well. The Centennial Teams Match of 1888 in Sydney was the first time that five colonies had competed against each other (NSW won). The firm of McGregor, Harris & Co., of Sydney presented a solid silver salver—in honour of the Centenary of the Colony—to be called ‘The All Nations Centennial Trophy’. This was to be competed for in twelve inter- colonial matches and become the property of the association whose representatives won it the greatest number of times.189 Over 700 men competed, of whom more than half were from outside NSW. The prize money of £2,250 was also the largest offered in Australia to that
190 time.
By contrast with NSW, in Victoria rifle shooting was promoted by its enthusiastic Minister for Defence, Sargood, which also gave civilian rifle clubs official sanction and a place in the defence establishment, albeit at its lowest level. Victoria disbanded its Volunteer force completely (although as will be seen, almost immediately began reconstituting new Volunteer forces from rifle clubs—the Victorian Mounted Rifles (VMR), followed by the Volunteer Rifles (later the Victorian Rangers). It was Major-General Downes, now Commandant in Victoria, who proposed the formation of the Rangers, essentially a more efficient version of the old rifle volunteer force he had pioneered in South Australia. Victoria drafted a large number of the volunteers into the paid Militia, and granted continuity of service.191 The Victorian Defence Department was granted a special appropriation of £110,000 a year for five years.192 In 1884 the VRA Council was expanded to 16 (Sargood was still a Vice-President in the council), and the rifle clubs became part of the ‘rifle reserves’.193
189 Anon., ‘A History [team matches]’, Marksman, Vol.37, No.6, December 1985, p. 21. 190 J.E. Corcoran, The Target Rifle in Australia, 1860-1900, p. 163. 191 These included many Volunteer officers. 192 1301.0 - Year Book Australia, 1909. 193 A. Beverley, ‘The VRA Jubilee - October 1910’, Bullseye, No.62, April 1994, p. 28. 22
In June 1884, at the first general parade under the Victorian militia system, the strength of the forces amounted to 406 permanent, 4,389 militia, 2,565 volunteers and 7,314 in the rifle reserves [rifle clubs], a total of 14,664.194 This would have met with the approval of many. One Volunteer officer remarked: ‘The formation of Rifle Clubs, while affording the means of agreeable recreation to its members, should be undertaken on account of its practical national utility’, while later historians commented that ‘government sponsored rifle clubs were established to absorb the widespread volunteer enthusiasm that remained throughout the colony and to ensure that as many able bodied men as possible, armed and trained in the use of the rifle, could be called upon to increase the army in time of war.’195
In the 1885 report of the Victorian Council of Defence, it referred to the establishment of rifle clubs in some detail:
10. The establishment of Rifle Clubs was taken into consideration [by the Victorian Defence Council in 1884] , and means devised to promote rifle practice throughout the colony, so as to make rifle shooting a national institution, and provide a large body of men accustomed to the use of weapons.
(a) To such clubs, muzzle-loading rifles were issued on loan, and Martini-Henry rifles and ammunition were sold at a reduced rate. In the first instance, Rifle Clubs were not allowed to be formed in towns where Militia were enrolled, so as not to interfere with the enrolment of that force. This rule has now been rescinded, as the Militia is up to its full strength, and men join the Rifle Clubs who could not give up sufficient time to serve in the Militia.
(b) That this movement has most heartily been taken up, and particularly in the country districts, is (31st July) shown by the fact that there are now 225 Rifle Clubs, with a total number of 6,540 members.
(c) Members of Rifle Clubs have purchased 2,020,230 rounds of ammunition and 1,551 Martini-Henry rifles, at a cost of £9,050. In addition to the rifles purchased, 3,700 Enfield rifles have been issued on loan.
194 G.R. Vazenry, Military Forces of Victoria 1854-1967, Central Army Records Office, Melbourne, 1970, pp. 2-3. 195 J.A. Christopherson, Notes on the Formation of Rifle Clubs, p. A2 and W.B. Calder, Heroes and Gentlemen: Colonel Tom Price and the Victorian Mounted Rifles, p. 6. 23
(d) These clubs are still increasing in number, and, from the facilities that the members have for frequent rifle practice, they may fairly be expected to furnish a large number of good shots.
11. Regulations were then framed for the affiliation of Rifle Clubs to the Militia, and a considerable number of the clubs have complied with the conditions therein prescribed. These should prove a valuable auxiliary in the event of an emergency arising.196
The popularity of the rifle clubs, particularly in Victorian country districts led to Department of Defence efforts to utilise them in some way. Lieutenant-Colonel Tom Price, a Victorian–born officer of the Indian Army who had recently retired to Victoria, was subsequently asked to be the controller of these clubs. Immediately seeing the inherent opportunities, he began enrolling the men of these clubs into a new corps, the VMR.197 Rifle club men were now also being ‘sworn in’ and by July 1885 over 200 had agreed to be so sworn in addition to the 1,300 already in the VMR; by 30 June 1886, the sworn-in riflemen from clubs, apart from the VMR, had increased to 3,095.198
In addition to the recruitment from (mostly) country rifle clubs into the VMR and later the Rangers, rifle clubs were also being affiliated with Militia infantry units, another suggestion of Downes. In January 1885 he had written to the Minister suggesting that:
…the privileges as regards the supply of ammunition and rifles to these clubs contingent on a proportion of the members engaging to serve as Militia Reserve for three years. If this can be arranged for, we should in the event of War be immediately able to lay our hands upon a certain number of men who could at any rate shoot and would be obliged to serve and who could be drafted into the present battalions which might be doubled or tripled in strength. I do not propose that the rifle clubs undertake any further obligation at present in regard to drilling in time of peace, but I am entirely opposed to any organisation at present which would have the effect of saddling us with a number of officers who could not possibly have any knowledge of the work which would be required from them on service.199
196 Report of the Council of Defence [Victoria], p. 4. 197 Price became the Commander of the VMR in mid-1885 in addition to Commander of Rifle Clubs. 198 Report of the Council of Defence [Victoria], John Ferres, Govt. Printer, Melbourne, 1885, p. 16 and W.B. Calder, Heroes and Gentlemen: Colonel Tom Price and the Victorian Mounted Rifles, pp. 19-20. 199 ‘Memo: Downes to Sargood, 6 January 1885’, B3756 (1887/2871A), NAA. 24
Downes did not recommend that rifle clubs form Volunteer units in their own right and was especially keen to avoid having rifle club men be appointed as Volunteer officers, whom he viewed with some suspicion after his experiences in South Australia. Downes went on to note that he had no objection to affiliating rifle clubs to Militia battalions, but not at the expense of accepting rifle club officers who could not perform on service. 200
Subsequently, the order was issued as Additional Regulations for Rifle Clubs that ‘Members of rifle clubs who take and subscribe the oath prescribed by the Discipline Act to serve for a period of three years, or until legally discharged, may be allowed to resign fourteen days after having given notice, in writing, to their Captain.’201 By this time there were more than 225 rifle clubs in Victoria and over 6,500 members (not all sworn). Over 1,500 Martini-Henry rifles and over 3,700 of the older Enfield rifles had been purchased by riflemen, along with over two million rounds of ammunition.202 In Victoria, under the leadership of Sargood, Downes and Price, rifle clubs were, at least on paper, developing into a useable military force.
The recruitment of rifle club men into the VMR and Rangers alone gave them a certain strength in rifle shooting not possessed by Victorian Militia units of the period. As will be seen however, when it came to asking rifle club men to attend maneuvers and military training beyond target shooting, rifle club men were as reluctant as always to participate, much to the frustration of the Militia and permanent military officers. It was a clear indication that riflemen enjoyed target shooting, but did not really see themselves as even part-time soldiers, despite paying lip-service to the concept in order to continue to receive Government support and assistance. It was to be a familiar story in the years ahead.
Downes recognised the deficiencies. He noted that ‘Rifle shooting has been popularised
200 ibid. 201 ‘G.O.314, 1 August 1885’, Victorian Military Forces: General Orders, John Ferres, Govt. Printer, Melbourne, 1885, p. 143. 202 Report of the Council of Defence [Victoria], p. 4. 25
throughout the land and good marksmen as regards ordinary target practice are numerous, though for the conditions of service much practice is necessary in firing at unknown distances and at moving and disappearing objects; but little has been done in this respect.’ He went on to say ‘the force would be an ‘efficient reserve to the militia or rather a second line of defence self-contained…Practically the infantry members of the Rifle Clubs are undrilled and consequently without discipline…..neither are the Rifle Clubs qualified to form a second line of defence and here. There is an additional reason; they have no officers and no organisation.’203
Nonetheless, despite Downes’ misgivings as to the practical utility of rifle club men as a military reserve, the VRA benefited enormously from this rapid expansion in rifle clubs and the number of men now actively practising at the ranges around Victoria. Sargood donated a major challenge trophy prize for competition in volley and skirmishing matches between Militia and Volunteer units; prizes were handed out by the Governor in large parades at the Melbourne Town Hall, attended by all the major staff officers and unit commanders as well. When the all-Australian team was selected for Wimbledon in 1886, five Victorians were selected. One came from the permanent garrison artillery, one from the VMR, and three from the militia infantry—and they were all former Volunteers.204
By mid-1887 the strength of the Victorian forces was: military 4,189, cadets 3,544, and rifle clubs 5,704. Of the hundreds of rifle clubs then in existence in the colony (from a mere handful in 1883), 968 were mounted (VMR) and another 4,736 rifle club members sworn in.205 Rifle clubs, formed by at least 20 men, could affiliate with Militia battalions, but were under no obligation to do so. In addition to cheap ammunition and service rifles provided on loan, rifle club men were also provided with free rail travel to range practices and matches. In
203 ‘Memo: Downes to Sargood, 10 November 1885’, Series B3756, NAA. 204 ‘G.O.340, 7 May 1886’, Victorian Military Forces: General Orders, John Ferres, Govt. Printer, Melbourne, 1886, p. 128. 205 G.R. Vazenry, Military Forces of Victoria 1854-1967, Ch.2, p. 4 and Report of the Council of Defence [Victoria], Robt. S. Brain, Govt. Printer, Melbourne, 1887, p. 14. Numbers of rifle clubs waxed and waned depending on recruiting into the VMR and later the VR. But the trend was an ever-increasing number being ‘gazetted’. 26
an emergency they were to serve with the Militia or with the VMR and their only real obligation was to turn up once a year and qualify under the same musketry course requirements as the Militia.206
There was more obligation placed on Volunteer members of the VMR and Rifle Volunteers (proclaimed as the Victorian Rangers in early 1889), both now placed under command of Price, including:
1. Members of a rifle club who elected to join the Volunteers and had been approved by the Officer Commanding could form a detachment of at least 20 men as long as there were sufficient detachments to form a company of not less than 120 men. 2. Enlistment was for three years with age limits being 18 to 35 years, except that ex-service members could join until 45 years of age, and cadets could join at 17 years. 3. Any member could resign giving 14 days notice in writing. 4. The training obligation was 12 daylight parades and 12 night drills per year. 5. To be classified as effective the volunteer had to attend all these parades and complete a course of musketry. 6. Failure to attend the 24 parades resulted in the member being struck off strength.207
Other colonies also saw increased military interest in the utilization of rifle clubs during the period after 1884. In South Australia, the Rifle Volunteer Force (RVF) structure continued under Downes and, when he left for Victoria, under his successor Brigadier General John Fletcher Owen, who arrived in mid-1885. Downes and Owen both had strong reservations about the efficacy of the independent RVF, Downes going so far as to describe it as a ‘dangerous sham’, based on its disinterest in drill.208 Owen also found himself in a public disagreement with Volunteer officers over the merits of the paid versus unpaid force: ‘As might be expected the dispassionate professional won the battle on argument of facts, but lost the confidence of a society which, in the affluence of the middle eighties, seemed to model
206 ‘G.O.611, 10 August 1887’, Victorian Military Forces: General Orders, Robt. S. Brain, Govt. Printer, Melbourne, 1887, pp. 256-257. 207 G.R. Vazenry, Military Forces of Victoria 1854-1967, Ch.3, pp. 35-36; ‘Regulations for Rifle Volunteers - G.O.18, 16 January 1888’, Victorian Military Forces: General Orders, Robt. S. Brain, Govt. Printer, Melbourne, 1888, pp. 9-21 and Report of the Council of Defence [Victoria], Robert S. Brain, Govt. Printer, Melbourne, 1888, p. 13. 208 F. Garie, ‘A Brief History of SARA to 1900’, npn. 27
itself on anything English and, therefore, was predisposed to [Volunteer] arguments and sentiments in favour of an English volunteer organization.’209
In 1886, the South Australian Government once again overhauled the regulations and the RVF was dissolved into a new Volunteer Militia Reserve Force (VMRF). Owen now wanted to godfather the rifle clubs and gain as much control over them as possible. The SANRA still administered rifle clubs in South Australia (now called Defence Rifle Clubs), but its council was reconstituted with military officers as well as civilians, and it was presided over by the local Commandant. For all intents and purposes it had now been ‘militarised’, although Owen’s reforms had been unpopular; his offer to continue in service for another two years was declined. 210
Rifle clubs were also coming under military pressure in Queensland. Queensland’s Defence Act of 1884 also introduced partially paid Militia and two military districts (north and South) were established to administer the new structure in 1885.211 From this point, Queensland rifle clubs, as long as their members joined a Volunteer unit, were sanctioned by the government ‘for the purposes of drill, arms and ammunition, under such conditions as may be prescribed, could be provided, but such bodies would not be provided with clothing or receive any allowance therefore.’ Henceforth, members of rifle clubs were ‘sworn in, [could] be called out for active service, [were] subject to discipline, and [were] liable for punishment for breach of discipline.’212
209 H.J. Zwillenberg, ‘Citizens and Soldiers: The Defence of South Australia 1836-1901’, p. 208. 210 Zwillenberg, p. 211. 211 See N.K. Meaney, A History of Australian Defence and Foreign Policy, 1901-23: The search for security in the Pacific, 1901-14, p. 24. A crisis over Pacific Islands and another Russian war threat, plus yet another military inquiry over the years 1883-85, propelled the changes to the Queensland defence structure. 212 N.S. Pixley, ‘Queensland: One Hundred Years of Defence’, Royal Historical Society of Queensland Journal, Vol. 6, No. 1, September 1959, p. 110 and Queensland Parliament, Votes and Proceedings 1884, p. 2120. A number of Volunteer Rifle Clubs existed in Brisbane prior to the passing of the Act of 1884, and these were constituted rifle clubs under the new Act. A.T. Jackson, Southern Queensland Rifle Association Jubilee, 1877- 1927: a brief History of the Association during the past Fifty Years, p. 22. 28
Rifle clubs in Queensland by the late 1880s thus added 1,200 to the 2,800 members of the Defence Force, sharing the rifle ranges with the Militia units.213 In short, rifle clubs had become de facto military units, although there was no real obligation to drill or partake in maneouvres. At the same time, by 1888 the QRA was also, like its peer rifle associations in the other colonies, a real beneficiary of the new defence structure in Queensland. The most direct result was the establishment of civilian rifle clubs across Queensland, and although by comparison to the richer colonies the QRA’s annual prize events were not as lavish (its 1888 programme had prizes of only £442/8/6, and the number of competitors was 103), the QRA saw the popularity of rifle shooting increase with the same status afforded it as in other colonies.214
Similarly, a new regime was about to begin in Tasmania when a new Commandant, Lieutenant Colonel William Vincent Legge, was appointed in December 1883 with the local rank of Colonel.215 Under Legge’s command the Tasmanian Forces were completely reorganised, a great deal of new equipment was provided, and annual field exercises were conducted during four days of continuous training.216 By 1886, a renewed interest in musketry had seen 24 rifle clubs being newly raised enrolled throughout the colony and by June 1888 numbers had increased to 35 clubs, with an active membership of 1,223.217 Alongside the Militia a new Volunteer force was formed in 1886, which included Tasmanian Rangers. These were drawn from the Country Rifle Clubs (CRC) organisation, which had developed from the original country rifle clubs which had survived after the collapse of the first TRA:
213 D.H. Johnson, Volunteers at Heart: The Queensland Defence Forces, 1860-1901, p. 132. 214 A.T. Jackson, Southern Queensland Rifle Association Jubilee, 1877-1927: a brief History of the Association during the past Fifty Years, p. 28. 215 For background on Legge, see the Dictionary of Australian Biographies, Angus and Robertson, 1949, in
By August 1886, eleven rifle clubs had been formed with 384 members. One or two clubs were willing to drill, and a number volunteered to join, unpaid, the annual four day Easter encampments that year and subsequently. The Tasmanian Rangers which began in 1886, like the Victorian Mounted Rifles and the Victorian Rangers, also traced their beginnings to rifle clubs. ….. By [mid-1887] there were 24 clubs with 739 ‘active’ members, but 92 were unarmed due to a shortage of suitable rifles. Easter 1888 saw 312 rifle club men join the encampment that year. The existence of the (new) Tasmanian Rifle Association was also acknowledged for the first time in the Commandant’s Report of 1888.218
Under this new Tasmanian scheme a superintendant of the CRC was appointed along with a musketry sergeant with 70 rounds of ammunition per man being provided free of charge by the Tasmanian Government:
The joining fee was 10 shillings with an annual subscription of 10 shillings. The Clubs provided their own ranges, butts, flags, markers and discs. The adoption of a uniform was optional, but if adopted the cost had to be borne by the club. Ammunition for matches and private practice was sold to the members at the same rate as paid by members of the Volunteer Force. Drill was entirely optional, but the Sergeant instructor, who visited Clubs to instruct in musketry theory and practice, also taught company drill and skirmishing to those who wished it, and most did.219
Only one Australian colony remained without a rifle association. By the end of the 1880s Western Australia remained fixed on its Volunteer structure which saw an expansion of new units formed through the decade, although these units remained small in size by the standards of the other colonies. In 1886, the extent of the Volunteer corps was reported in the Victoria Express: the Naval Artillery and Perth Artillery each had a force of 39; the Metropolitan Rifles 125; Fremantle Rifles 121; Guildford Rifles 52; Geraldton Rifles 59; Northampton Rifles 38; and the Albany Defence Corps 81. The increase in membership during the previous year had
218 D.M Wyatt, Tasmanian Country Rifle Clubs - 1885-1890, p. 1, unpub., provided to A. Kilsby by the author 2010, and D.M. Wyatt, Tasmanian Country Rifle Clubs 1885 - 1890 and Tasmanian Auxiliary Force 1890-1897, unpub. MS, provided to A. Kilsby by the author March 2011. 219 D.M. Wyatt, With the Volunteers: A Historical Diary of the Volunteer Military Forces of the North-West and West Coasts of Tasmania 1886-1986, pp. 1-2. 30
been 54.220 Musketry practice remained the main pre-occupation of such forces. There were no civilian rifle clubs, however, allowed in the colony for the purposes of target shooting.
While these defence and associated rifle club developments were gaining momentum, as previously noted, momentum also began to build across the Australian colonies after 1885 to create a union of rifle associations to manage intercolonial and international shooting. The 1887 intercolonial matches in Adelaide and then the Sydney Centennial matches in 1888, when all five colonies came together, was the catalyst to discuss the formation of a ‘national’ council. This might seem unremarkable today but it was remarkable then—there was no other sporting or other ‘national’ body which was organising on a federal basis.221 Moreover, because of its deep ties with defence matters through the membership of thousands of former and active Volunteers and Militia men, and their officers, this was also the nascent stirrings of federalism writ small, in the idea of a national rifle shooting association, albeit with a defence flavour.
In Sydney, at the Centenary matches of 1888, delegates agreed to call the new organisation ‘The General Council of Rifle Associations of Australasia’, even though there was no association yet in Western Australia and New Zealand was not formally invited to send delegates.222 In the chair was the forthright Lieutenant-Colonel J. M. Templeton of Victoria, the former Volunteer officer who now commanded a metropolitan Militia battalion. The initial objects of the General Council were simple and led by ‘the promotion and conduct of intercolonial rifle competitions and the decision of any question in connection with rifle-
220 G.F. Wieck, The Volunteer Movement in Western Australia 1861-1903, p. 87 and Heritage Council of Western Australia ‘Register of Heritage Places Assessment Documentation Geraldton Drill Hall 1’. 221 Australian Rules Football, rugby, sailing, rowing, cycling were all decades behind the rifle club movement in this regard. The first national cricket body was not formed until 1892. 222 An intercolonial match had been fired in New Zealand in mid-1888, and the New Zealand defence and rifle shooting structures and experience were very similar to the Australian colonies at the time. The New Zealand rifle association riflemen were certainly regarded as fraternal. E.E. Grant, ‘A Short History of the Commonwealth Teams Matches’, Marksman, Vol.19, No.9, November 1967, p. 22. 31
shooting that may be referred to it by any rifle association.’223 The Commanding Officer of the military forces of the colony in which the meetings of the general council are held was to be the ex officio president of the council, but hold a casting vote if required.224
So by 1888 the colonial rifle associations and the rifle club organisation had come a long way from the situation of almost 20 years earlier. With the departure of the Imperial garrisons from the Australian colonies from 1871 the colonial rifle associations had struggled, to a greater or lesser degree, to meet their objectives in the face of government parsimony and the lack of regulation and rules. Safety issues also impacted on the use of key metropolitan rifle ranges as rifle technology—and therefore range and lethality—continued to improve. By 1878, as the Jervois and Scratchley reviews of colonial defence arrangements got underway, the South Australian Commandant, Downes, tried to rein in the independence of the volunteer rifle companies (rifle clubs) with limited success. It was a forerunner of what would come in other colonies as well once the governments began to absorb the recommendations of the defence reviews and uniformly agreed to introduce partially-paid militia into the mix of the colonial military forces.
The introduction of Militia forces across all of the Australian colonies meant that colonial governments also began to employ professional, British Army commandants along with key staff to organise these forces. Meanwhile, while many Volunteer officers and men transferred into Militia units, many did not. Some remained in Volunteer units, others joined or formed rifle clubs and civilian rifle clubs began to appear. The rifle associations were dominated by Volunteer officers or Militia officers who were formerly Volunteer officers. These men had tentatively begun to think of themselves as part of a ‘national’ movement, but completely within the context of their Volunteer mentality. The Volunteer officers rejected the idea that civilian rifle clubs had any role in the rifle association activities. Ironically, they were also
223 J.E. Corcoran, The Target Rifle in Australia 1860-1900, p. 202. 224 Sydney Morning Herald, 21 February 1888, p. 9. The first formal meeting of the General Council would be held in Hobart in December 1888. 32
suspicious of professional military officers and enthusiastic Militia officers who wanted to harness Volunteers and rifle club members and place them under some form of statutory military discipline.
Towards the end of this period, the rifle associations had begun to cooperate, haltingly but progressively, in conducting intercolonial matches and initiating international matches. The visit to Wimbledon and Creedmoor in 1876 was a powerful stimulant to rifle shooting leading up to the militia period. However it was the all-Australian team which went to England in 1886 soon after the Sudan campaign, that popularised rifle shooting even more than in 1876. By the time the colonial rifle associations formed their first General Council in 1888, the combination of new defence structures, the introduction of the new Martini-Henry service rifle, international and intercolonial competitions and the growth of rifle clubs encouraged in part by defence needs (especially in Victoria), had stimulated ‘federal’ thoughts among riflemen.
While there were, therefore, many complementarities between the formal military establishments and the leadership of the rifle associations, the beginnings of an underlying conflict between the needs of the rifle associations for income (entry fees to compete in target shooting for money prizes) and the professional military establishment for trained soldiers in times of emergency (soldiers who could shoot and drill) were evident. The associations, controlled by like-minded Volunteer officers, became caught between their needs to perpetuate and develop target shooting for prizes and the need to respond to the military needs inherent in their own association objectives—to promote rifle shooting among the military forces. The professional military establishment, always under financial pressure, wanted cheap soldiers but also wanted trained soldiers, which meant not just musketry skills but also men who could be moved efficiently on a battlefield. These contradictions would come to the fore in the coming decade; the Boer War would accentuate them.
33
Chapter 3
Progress and pain 1888-1896
This chapter will investigate the growing sentiment towards a new ‘Federal’ perspective symbolized among riflemen by the formation of the first national council for rifle associations in 1888. Its main purpose was to promote and conduct the intercolonial rifle competition (essentially a military match series). The Defence inspection reports delivered to colonial governments by General Sir James Bevan Edwards in October 1889 also contributed to a wider outlook among military men as well.225 Edwards had been appointed by the British Government to conduct an inspection of colonial defences. Both of his reports, which paid some attention to the role of rifle clubs as potential defence assets, and the related, but more prosaic matters affecting rifle shooting discussed by the newly formed General Council, were written through a ‘federal’ prism. Less than a decade later the rifle shooting associations and clubs were expanding under the positive encouragement of the military. Some rifle shooting clubs however, were quietly resisting attempts by the military authorities to bring rifle shooting activities under their control. There were basic conflicts of interest not so much about the aims of the two groups, but rather the means of carrying them out.
From 1888-1896 modernising military commanders clashed with the conservative colonial rifle associations. The Imperial staff officers in the colonial defence structure, and many militia officers, anxious to put in place an effective federal defence structure, wanted to incorporate rifle clubs into that defence structure. Rifle clubs were increasingly regarded as quasi-military units. From the military perspective, rifle club members were already under some sort of discipline, had sworn an oath of allegiance, could shoot and used the service rifle, with many having previous military service. So rifle clubs seemed to provide Defence with one large potential resource.
225 A.J. Hill, 'Edwards, Sir James Bevan (1834 - 1922)', Australian Dictionary of Biography, Volume 4, Melbourne University Press, 1972, p. 130.
1
On the other hand, the conservative and at times financially struggling rifle associations, dominated by ex-Volunteer and now Militia officers, were sympathetic to the military aims to some extent, but at the same time, under other pressures to resist them. The Australian-wide recession of 1891-1895 led to reduced defence forces in all colonies; this in turn meant fewer subsidies for rifle associations from Militia and Volunteer subscriptions and therefore smaller purses for prize shooting. Yet the official sanctioning by colonial defence establishments of civilian rifle clubs which followed on from Edwards’ reports, gave non-military rifle clubs more of a voice in rifle association affairs, which before 1888 had been the singular preserve of Volunteers. Overall, the period to 1896 would see a general phase of growth by the rifle club ‘movement’ that nonetheless, continued to exacerbate the rifle club-Defence division on how rifle club and marksmen could best be utilised.
There was, in the years to 1888, a growing view among military men that rifle associations were not as engaged with Defence objectives in musketry as hoped for. For example, a long report in the Sydney Morning Herald on the large prize-giving parade of the Volunteers and Militia in December 1885, noted that competition should not be the end but the means as far as rifle shooting was concerned:
The importance of this association, and the work it does, arises from the fact that the promotion of rifle shooting, beyond the mere initial stages of musketry instruction, is left to the energy and enthusiasm of private individuals, and except for a grant of some hundreds of pounds by the Government, no steps whatever are taken by the constituted authorities to secure practical efficiency in this most essential branch of military service…
…Excepting only one match, the Association programme is confined to mere match shooting, at large targets, at known distances and, however well high scores on the target may sound to the ear, everyone knows that to the sense they offer a poor guarantee of good marksmanship in the field in actual service.226
226 ‘Sydney Morning Herald, 21 December 1885’, in Report of the New South Wales Rifle Association for the year 1885, Thomas Richards, Govt. Printer, Sydney, 1886, pp. 58-59. 2
The scene was set, in February 1888, for the formation of what was to become Australia’s oldest national sporting body, when colonial rifle shooting representatives met in Sydney to formulate some guidelines and principles in order to form a Council.227 When the speeches were given at the conclusion of the NSWRA Centennial Matches, Victoria’s Colonel Templeton actually proposed a toast to the ‘National Rifle Association of Australia’.228 This was certainly premature, but he wasn’t the only one with a vision for what could be. ‘The federal idea in regard to rifle-shooting was growing’, reported the NRA of NSW, ‘and was stronger now than ever, and [Templeton] thought it would be a good idea to have an intercolonial volunteer camp.’229
The presidents of the General Council were the military Commandants of the colonies. Most were career British army officers whose colonial service was a stepping stone to greater things or a last post before retirement. It helped if the Commandant was sympathetic to the rifle-shooting ideals of the association but this was not critical. It certainly did not help if the commandant was antagonistic. Whatever their attitudes, the Commandants held if not the purse-strings then certainly the levers of rifle shooting administration—access to key rifle ranges, modern rifles and ammunition supplies—and so could not be ignored. Most important the commandants had command over the Volunteers, Militia and permanent local forces in that colony. It was the participation of these forces in rifle association matches which gave the associations the bulk of their income.
The Centennial and intercolonial prize meeting in Sydney in February 1888 at which the General Council was formed was in effect a great gathering of Australian riflemen and Volunteers. Discussions of a future federation of the colonies at a political level were matched by discussions about forming Australian rifle teams to compete at Wimbledon. But parochial rivalries between the
227 The General Council brought military rifle shooting and sport together, which evolved into large bore target shooting as we know it today. Military musketry training remained separate from the General Council’s control, just as prize shooting, by and large, rested with the General Council and colonial, then State, rifle associations. The first national cricket body was not formed until 1892. 228 Report of the New South Wales Rifle Association 1887 and Grand Centennial Matches’, Charles Potter, Govt. Printer, Sydney, 1888, p. 88. 229 ibid. 3
colonies, especially between Victoria and NSW, often stood in the way of attempts at real federal cooperation in the political and defence spheres. Nonetheless, the men who met in Sydney formed the backbone of rifle shooting in the Australian colonies and their leaders mostly had a ‘big picture’ view of what had to be done.
The first formal meeting of the General Council of Rifle Associations was held in Hobart in December 1888.230 Even the Council of the NSWRA, flushed with the success of their Centennial Matches, opined that ‘It is confidently anticipated that this General Council will tend to preserve the cordial relations now existing between the several Rifle Associations who have joined therein, and to promote rifle-shooting generally throughout Australasia.’231 However, these comments belied the uncertainty below the surface, especially in NSW, as to how the General Council would actually work in practice. It was not to long before ‘cordial relations’ at the federal level were tested and found wanting by the same intercolonial rivalries and tensions which had given rise to the General Council in the first place.
The delegates to the first meeting of the General Council considered matters both mundane and controversial. Several important decisions made, included to follow British Army standards in adopting a prone firing position throughout all matches. Another more controversial decision was that ‘competitors shall be members of the Defence force, and sworn in for defence purposes.’232 This essentially meant that civilian rifle club members could no longer compete in intercolonial matches; the aim of which remained to improve the musketry standards of the Volunteers and Militia. Victoria duly complained that it:
230 Proceedings of the First Annual Meeting of the General Council of the Rifle Associations of Australasia held at Hobart on December 22, 1888, ‘The Mercury’ Office, Tasmania, 1889, p. 2. 231 Report of the New South Wales Rifle Association 1887 and Grand Centennial Matches’, p. 12. 232 Proceedings of the First Annual Meeting of the General Council of the Rifle Associations of Australasia held at Hobart on December 22, 1888, p. 13. 4
had this disadvantage that many of her best shots came from the rifle clubs; and the rifle clubs not being recognized in the militia or volunteer forces of the Colony, they could not, to comply with the conditions of the match, be chosen.’233
At the later Intercolonial Match in Hobart in December 1888, it is significant that the Tasmanian entries included members of Country Rifle Clubs, by then part of the Tasmanian Defence Reserves. This gave Tasmania the best shots available, and perhaps it was no coincidence that it won the match that year. As a result, the colonies would be unable to field their strongest teams until civilians were sworn in and the colonial defence authorities recognised clubs as part of defence accordingly (which NSW appeared to be doing by forming ‘Reserve Rifle Companies’ aka rifle clubs). So the seeds were
234 further sown for the potential ‘militarisation’ of civilian rifle clubs across all colonies.
The contentious issue of sights was also discussed at the inaugural meeting of the council in Hobart. The NSWRA was the only colony to use sliding wind-gauges on its rear sights, and it was caught between the insistence of the military Commandant in that colony on using that particular sight on the Government-issue Henry rifle, and the other colonies which did not.235
The Victorians in particular felt that service rifles should be used as they would be under service conditions. In an ironic twist, intercolonial matches in Sydney in October 1888 saw the NSW team using Martini-Henry rifles, but with wind-gauge sights and the Victorians who won the match, with open sights. The NSW team then blamed lack of practice with the new rifles for their loss.236 Even the Tasmanian commandant and president of the General Council commented on his aversion to the use of sliding bar sights in the field. The NSWRA stance on the sights question was defeated; they were no longer to be used. On the surface at least, the meeting had been a good start to the new
233 ‘Daily Telegraph, 18 February, 1888’ in Report of the New South Wales Rifle Association 1887 and Grand Centennial Matches’, p. 113. 234 Mercury, 24 December 1888, p. 4. Simply put, although the civilian club members were fewer in number, they simply had more time to practice than their Militia equivalents, and so were generally more proficient. 235 It was considered that a wind-gauge sight gave a rifleman unfair advantage when target shooting on the one hand, and should not be used with service rifles on the basis that in the field, a soldier would have no time for adjusting such a sight, and open sights were most appropriate. 236 Report of the New South Wales Rifle Association for the year 1884’, Thomas Richards, Govt. Printer, Sydney, 1885, p. 62. 5
Council. The meeting details were fully reported in the Mercury, and no doubt read avidly by all riflemen once the newspaper was delivered by intercolonial steamers and by shorter telegraphic reports around the Australian colonies.237
The General Council of Rifle Associations of Australasia had thus taken the first steps to regulate inter-colonial matches and associated aspects such as sights, and the role of civilian rifle clubs. The next meeting of the General Council was held in November 1889 in Melbourne, following the Intercolonial Match. The NSWRA rifle team and the NSWRA representatives to the General Council were noticeably absent. In protest that the previous meeting had decided that no sliding sights would be used in the 1889 matches, NSW declined to attend. The NSWRA gave news that it would not send a team early in 1889 with a letter to the General Council, copied to all concerned associations. It professed to want to continue to be part of the General Council and its proceedings, but then waited until the eve of the VRA matches in early November 1889 to telegraph its decision not to send representatives to the council meeting either. It seems the NSW association had taken offence. 238
To add insult to injury, NSW also refused, for the first time, to allow the Queensland rifle team to travel with franked tickets over the NSW railway system, effectively preventing Queensland from attendance at the matches in Melbourne.239 In any event, the Queenslanders had also felt that there were few incentives to travel, even if they could, because few of the VRA prize meeting matches allowed non-Defence riflemen to compete, and quite a high proportion of the Queensland team were members of civilian rifle clubs. The QRA was also altogether unsure about even remaining with the General Council at all, faced as it was by very tight finances. Colonel A. J. Thynne however, persuaded the QRA Council to honour its February 1888 commitments. Finally, the QRA sent a
237 Mercury, 24 December 1888, p. 4. A full copy of the formal report of the December 1888 conference is also contained in J.E. Corcoran, The Target Rifle in Australia 1860-1900, pp. 201-16. 238 The vexed NSWRA refused to participate in intercolonial matches for the next three years. J.E. Corcoran, The Target Rifle in Australia, 1860-1900, p. 163. 239 Argus, 13 November 1889, p. 9. 6
representative, Frank Stanley Shepherdson, a Volunteer with the Brisbane Rifles, to represent it at the 1889 General Council meeting.240
In June 1889, the QRA had agreed with the NSWRA resolutions with regard to the sliding bar sight, and determined to allow that device in its own association matches from 1890. The QRA, closer to the NSWRA than any other association (just as the South Australian and Tasmanian associations tended to be closer to the VRA on issues), had instructed Shepherdson to urge the use of wind-gauges at the 1889 council meeting, in effect acting as surrogate for the NSWRA. However, Shepherdson’s attempts to have wind-gauge sights allowed at the next intercolonial matches, set for Brisbane in 1890, were rebuffed. The wind-gauge was not, however, allowed in the Kolapore Cup teams match at the NRA prize meeting at Bisley in England in 1890, and so the issue remained unresolved. 241 The sight issue really came down to a preference in its use rather than any practical consideration; but the issue acted as a proxy for intercolonial rifle shooting rivalries which continued in one form or another well into the 20th century.
Unfortunately the absence of the NSWRA was only the beginning of a deterioration of relations between the largest colony’s rifle association and the General Council over the next decade and more. In a cross-Tasman footnote to these developments, Australian colonial teams were invited to compete at special matches set up by the NZRA on the occasion of the New Zealand and South Seas Exhibition, which opened in Dunedin on 29 November 1889. Victoria, South Australia, NSW and Queensland agreed to send teams for the matches in mid-January 1890. Only the Victorians and South Australians, however, turned up.242
240 Brisbane Courier, 17 June 1889, p. 7. Shepherdson, who was Victoria-born and had spent time in the Victorian Volunteers, was now a Volunteer with the Brisbane Rifles, a member of the Metropolitan Rifle Club, and a relatively new QRA Council member. Shepherdson later enlisted in the 1st AIF in World War One, aged 50, and died on active service. 241 The NRA had moved from Wimbledon to Bisley in Surrey in 1890. 242 Otago Witness, 16 January 1890, p. 17. 7
Against the weighty matters of Imperial defence the issues facing the General Council, contentious though at times they were for the colonial riflemen, paled into insignificance. However, the two developments were not entirely unconnected. As noted, General Edwards delivered his detailed reports into the defences of the Australian colonies to the colonial governments in October 1889. Most important perhaps was Edwards’ recognition in his reports that effective defence of Australia could not be successfully implemented without a federation.243 This gave further impetus to a Federation Council formed in 1891 to give the colonial bureaucrats and politicians a vehicle for discussing barriers to federation, such as tariffs—or even whether federation was desirable at all.
Edwards’ report also led, in 1891, to an Australia-wide inspection tour by colonial military commandants of sites for fixed defences, such as Thursday Island in the Torres Strait and Albany in Western Australia.244 This was, for all intents and purposes, the first intercolonial commandants’ ‘conference’, albeit informally while en route from Thursday Island to Albany by ship and one where rifle clubs and associations were almost certainly discussed. It seems more than coincidence that from about 1892 commandants seemed to be sending the same message to associations: put more service style matches into the annual prize meetings.
While Edwards’ report was not the first to be delivered on colonial defences, it was the first to consider rifle clubs in any detail. He recommended that the number of rifle clubs be expanded and encouraged by all colonial governments. He also noted the need for construction of more rifle ranges to encourage weekly practice.245 Among the raft of recommendations, both general and particular, was a specific suggestion that volunteer riflemen become reservists for the militia. Edwards saw rifle clubs as the ‘ready reserve’ and recommended their extension across the country
243 A.J. Hill, 'Edwards, Sir James Bevan (1834-1922)', Australian Dictionary of Biography, National Centre of Biography, Australian National University, http://adb.anu.edu.au/biography/edwards-sir-james-bevan-3470/text5309, accessed 14 June 2013. 244 D.H. Johnson, Volunteers at Heart: The Queensland Defence Forces, 1860-1901, University of Queensland Press, St. Lucia, 1975, p. 120. 245 N. Scudder, and M. Moses, (ed.), A History of the ANZAC Rifle Range, Malabar, N. Scudder, Maroubra, 1993, pp. 21-22. 8
and ‘attached great importance to the system of rifle companies, first begun by Downes in South Australia and now common throughout the colonies, as a potential reserve for the rapid expansion of the forces in wartime.’246 For Queensland, which had no militia and few Volunteers, Edwards strongly recommended that rifle clubs ‘be placed on a more definite footing’.247 These recommendations were to have far-reaching consequences for rifle associations and clubs in the Australian colonies.
Subsequent to Edwards’ report, most of the colonies upgraded their respective Defence Acts. His report stimulated demands for a rifle association in Western Australia and gave impetus to considering exactly how rifle clubs could meet defence needs. Edwards’ report also stimulated thinking about the type of matches being fired at the annual meetings of the colonial associations— were the traditional long range individual target shooting matches suitable training for an active service environment? It stirred interest by military officers in the potential resource that rifle clubs seemed to offer them. It also raised into prominence over the following years a number of important differences between the way that colonial rifle associations had been developing and how the military officers thought they should be developing.
In short, Edwards’ report was a further and important catalyst to what was to become a fundamental issue. This was, whether rifle shooting as managed by the associations was there to support the training of the military rifle shot, or to train civilian marksmen to win prizes. In the short term military control of rifle clubs expanded. Stanley has noted that the trend towards greater professional control was evident when civilian rifle clubs became reserve rifle companies in NSW and members were required to wear uniforms; when shooting passed under the control of staff
246 S.J. Clarke, ‘Marching to Their Own Drum: British Officers as Military Commandants in the Australian Colonies and New Zealand 1870-1901’, p. 108. 247 ‘Report of Major General Edwards, C.B., upon the local forces and defences of Queensland, with scheme for the organization of the military forces of the Australian colonies’, Queensland Parliament Report CA 99-1889, 9 October 1889, James C. Beal, Govt. Printer, Brisbane, 1889. 9
officers in South Australia; and when in Victoria membership of clubs declined from 6,500 in 1885 to 2,000 in 1892 as military demands encroached upon their sport.248
Even before Edwards delivered his report, some military officers had been considering the military value of rifle clubs and making recommendations to increase their direct relationships to the defence of the colonies. In November 1887, the first permanent head of the Victorian Defence Department and former South Australian Commandant, Major General Downes, wrote a memo on this subject.249 Noting the undrilled and undisciplined nature of rifle club members, Downes believed that it would ‘cause infinite confusion and court disaster’, to draft rifle club men into battalions to make up war strengths. As Downes pointed out, the rifle clubs had no officers and no organisation to fit them as reserves. Downes stated that £200 had been put aside in 1886-87 and again in the 1887-88 Estimates to employ drill instructors at selected rifle clubs. Downes then proposed to institute a Rifle Volunteer Force (RVF) to overcome this problem. This was similar in concept to the scheme which had been introduced into South Australia.250 The RVF idea, of rifle companies drawn from rifle clubs, was subsequently adopted by the Victorian Government. In turn, the Victorian Rifle Volunteers (RV) was re-designated as the Victorian Rangers in March 1889.251
New Victorian regulations were issued for rifle clubs in January 1889. The regulations stated that soldiers of the Victorian Mounted Rifles (VMR) and RV, who were also members of rifle clubs, were enlisted for three years but should only serve in their own units in time of emergency. Further, only
248 P. Stanley, ‘ “Soldiers and Fellow Countrymen” in Colonial Australia’, p. 86. Downes’ experience with forming rifle volunteer companies strongly attracted Edwards to the concept and this was reflected in his reports to the colonial governments. 249 M.F. Downes, ‘Memorandum on Rifle Clubs as at present constituted - and suggestions by which to increase their value as a portion of the defensive force of the Colony’, 10 November 1887, pp. 1-9, Series B3756, NAA. 250 ibid. This was not the first memo on the subject - two years earlier the Commandant in Victoria had written to the Minister for Defence, Sir Frederick Sargood, suggesting that only by forcing rifle club men into the militia reserves could they be called upon to serve in an emergency and gain the knowledge required to become efficient soldiers upon call-up. However, this reserve system was a complete failure - Edwards had reported that Victoria had Reserves of 2,593 but when the new Commandant of Victoria, Major General Sir Alexander Bruce Tulloch, arrived in November 1889, he found the actual number to be only 25! Report of the Council of Defence [Victoria], Robert S. Brain, Govt. Printer, Melbourne, 1892, p. 9. 251 R.K. Peacock, ‘The Victorian Rangers’, The Victorian Historical Magazine, Vol.17, No.1, May 1938, pp. 1-18. 10
these types of part-time troops could be transferred between rifle clubs.252 The new Victorian Rangers rapidly formed into a number of 120 men companies. In the mid-1889 ‘Return of Rifle Clubs’ provided by the Council for Defence in Victoria, it was reported that 48 rifle clubs had disbanded over the past year. But by then there were 1,016 men in the VMR, 716 in the Victorian Rangers and 2,649 rifle club members—plus 15 sergeant-majors and five officer staff.253
The Commander of Rifle Clubs, Colonel Price, had quickly seen the potential of rifle club men in country districts in particular. He drew upon those clubs extensively to create the VMR which he was then appointed to command. Initially commander of Victorian Rangers as well, he handed over the command to HQ in 1889 to focus on the VMR. The combination of VMR and Ranger recruitment upon rifle club membership was the main reason for the fall in numbers of rifle club members in Victoria; the ‘churn’ in rifle clubs was to continue through to the advent of the Boer War in late 1899. Meanwhile, the Victorian Defence Department copied rifle association practices and set aside money as prizes for drill and musketry for the Militia in a bid to improve scores and interest in musketry.254
In some respects, the most military minded of the rifle club members in Victoria were joining the VMR, Rangers, or other reserve companies, and that trend was emulated to some degree in the other colonies. Only in Victoria’s case however, were new Volunteer units cannibalizing rifle clubs’ membership for their own recruits to such an extent. Some of those left were not as congenial towards increasing military demands for their participation in parades and musketry courses. As more groups needed to use rifle ranges, more conflicts also began to occur over which group had precedence on range use.
252 ‘G.O.87, 30 January 1889’, Victorian Military Forces: General Orders, Robt. S. Brain, Govt. Printer, Melbourne, 1889, pp. 39-44. 253 Report of the Council of Defence [Victoria], Robert S. Brain, Govt. Printer, Melbourne, 1889, p. 12. The VMR, VR and rifle club members were all Volunteers. 254 Report of the Council of Defence [Victoria], 1889, p. 5. 11
Meanwhile, in Tasmania, the trend to militarise the rifle association and clubs continued. The former Country Rifle Clubs organisation was reconstituted as the Auxiliary Force, divided into 17 companies in 48 locations around the colony. By 1890 its strength was 1,421 and in that year the force was also issued with Martini-Henry rifles.255 While these developments were underway, the Colonial Defence Committee of the British Government, from its lofty throne in London, commented on Edwards’ report in August 1890, by stating inter alia that it was:
unable to regard the rifle companies as at present fulfilling the conditions of a reserve, for, while it is undoubtedly most desirable to encourage rifle shooting by way of these companies, they appear to be in some cases to be only private associations assisted by the colonial governments, and not under a general obligation to serve in the ranks in times of need.256
Such comments certainly did not slow the rapid expansion of rifle clubs in all colonies. In South Australia and NSW, the formation of new reserve rifle companies was now officially sanctioned by the Edwards’ report, leading, in South Australia’s case, to the formation of the SANRA in 1893.257 Rifle clubs were also affiliated with militia units in their area. The Illustrated Sydney News of 6 March 1890 was full of enthusiasm for the new regime:
Now that the Defence Forces of this Colony are attracting so much attention, and the numbers of volunteers are being so largely augmented by the formation of rifle reserve companies in all parts of the country, the work and progress of the New South Wales Rifle Association is becoming of great public interest. …..Our Defence Force at the present time includes about 8,000 men, who are, more or less, trained in the use of the rifle; and a large proportion of these men are active members of the Institution which directs rifle shooting in the Colony.258
255 D.M. Wyatt, A Lion in the Colony: An Historical Outline of the Tasmanian Colonial Volunteer Forces 1859-1901, p. 36. 256 Report of the Council of Defence [Victoria], 1892, p. 17. In South Australia, civilian rifle clubs were allowed to be run by civilians for the first time. F. Garie, ‘A Brief History of SARA to 1900’, npn. 257 South Australian National Rifle Association: Rules and By-laws, C. E. Bristow, Govt. Printer, Adelaide, 1893, p. 3. The individualists in the old SARA stayed aloof from these developments, while those of German descent also formed their own Sud Australiasche Deiutsche Allgemeiner Verien (South Australian German General Shooting Association). V. Potezny, ‘South Australian German Shooting Companies (Kingship and Ring Target Shooting)’, p. 1. 258 ‘Illustrated Sydney News, 6 March 1890’, Report of the New South Wales Rifle Association 1889, Charles Potter, Govt. Printer, Sydney, 1890, p. 73. 12
Meanwhile, across in Western Australia, Edwards’ report both encouraged and abetted Volunteer officers in that colony to take action on the formation of a rifle association. An investigation of its formation—and demise—is a good example of how the organisation of rifle shooting, even in a small colony like Western Australia, was progressing.259 It also provides a good example of how the nexus between defence thinking and the rifle clubs was progressing in the only colony without a rifle association. Politics also played a major part in developments there. Edwards’ report on colonial defences raised awareness of the inadequacy of the defences of Western Australia like never before; especially when it was leaked to the local press in September that year.
In December 1889 Western Australia had a population of fewer than 44,000 and it supported from that population a small but slowly growing force of just over 600 Volunteers, mostly infantry. The Volunteers were armed with a mixture of Martini-Henry and Snider rifles, and quality varied widely. To be efficient the Western Australian Volunteers had to attend 12 parades a year and fire off 40 rounds at musketry practice but by 1890 even the prize money put aside by the Government to encourage marksmanship had dropped to £10 per annum.260 This was little incentive for those keen to improve their proficiency with the rifle.
In the background, political developments in Western Australia, which would affect rifle shooting in the near future, were moving at a fast pace. The Governor, Sir Frederick Napier Broome, although personally unpopular in the colony, had been a prime force behind self-government for Western Australia. A constitution was being prepared, but Broome’s argumentative nature and clashes with the senior colonial administrators finally led to his departure in December 1889.261 Co- incidentally the Commandant of Local Forces, Lieutenant Colonel William George Phillimore, also resigned with the Governor’s departure, exhausted from a three year battle to get any defence money
259 Western Australia finally achieved self-rule in 1891. 260 W.A. Gale, Western Australian Year-Book for 1889, Richard Pether, Govt. Printer, Perth, 1889, pp. 59-74. 261 F.K. Crowley, 'Broome, Sir Frederick Napier (1842–1896)', Australian Dictionary of Biography, National Centre of Biography, Australian National University,
at all to manage the Volunteer forces and ‘as his services had been so little appreciated’.262 Edwards’ report had indicated a need for partially-paid forces, but money remained an issue and everything was on hold in the colony while self-government awaited realisation.
In January 1890 Captain Henry Lionel Pilkington, late of the 21st Hussars and formerly Broome’s Private Secretary, was appointed Commandant with local rank of Major. The Colonial Secretary, Sir Malcolm Fraser, CMG, KCMG and a former Volunteer himself, became, as Administrator, de facto Governor while awaiting Napier’s replacement.263 This fortunate combination allowed Pilkington to act quickly. Within two weeks of taking command Pilkington proposed a military tournament—held on 16 April with about 4,000 spectators—and that a rifle association be formed.264 Morale soared among the Volunteers. The Volunteer officers held the first annual general meeting to form the Rifle Association of Western Australia (WARA) on 26 March 1890. Fraser became patron and Pilkington its ex officio president. The objects of the new association were ‘to promote rifle shooting in Western Australia and to encourage and assist the formation of rifle clubs in the colony.’265 The meeting enrolled 47 members and agreed on the rules before it elected a council, comprised mostly of Volunteer officers; ex officio members of the council were another raft of Volunteer officers.266
The first match held under the auspices of the WARA was at the military tournament in Guildford in mid-April 1890. Teams of five men from each of the Volunteer Corps fired at ‘Hythe [British Army School of Musketry standard targets’ at 200, 300 and 500 yards, with seven shots each.267 This was followed by a smaller match fired over successive Saturdays in late May and early June at the Mt. Eliza range. Competing for a £10 prize—this seems suspiciously like, and may even have been, the budgeted annual Government prize—18 men fired the first day and nine the second.
262 Report of the Commandant of the Local Forces of Western Australia for 1889, Richard Pether, Govt. Printer, Perth, 1890, p. 6 and the West Australian, 14 October 1889, p. 3. 263 Sir William Cleaver Francis Robinson, GCMG, who arrived as governor of Western Australia, for the third time in his career, in October 1890. 264 West Australian, 18 January, 1890, p. 3. 265 West Australian, 27 March 1890, p. 3. 266 Rules of the Rifle Association of Western Australia 1890, T. Bryan, ‘W.A. Record’, Perth, 1890, npn. 267 West Australian, 19 April 1890, p. 3. 14
Even Pilkington joined in on the first day of shooting.268 Momentum continued when the Albany Rifle Club was formed on 9 July 1890. It was the first ever civilian rifle club in Western Australia, with 40 members, and was immediately affiliated with the WARA.269
However, just as a window of opportunity had opened for the WARA, it just as quickly closed. On 30 June 1890 Pilkington resigned after only six months as Commandant and departed for England, apparently to re-join his former superior Broome, who had been appointed Governor of Trinidad.270 Pilkington was replaced as Commandant by retired Volunteer Major and now Western Australia’s Police Commissioner, George Braithwaite Phillips. Although Phillips also became the new ex officio president of WARA, a further set-back occurred in October with the arrival of the new Governor, who apparently had little interest in the association. Looming over all of these developments was the start of the Australia-wide depression in 1891, which lasted for several years and had an immediate impact on commercial life, other than on the goldfields. WARA sank without a trace, much like the first attempts to form the QRA and the TRA, and for many of the same reasons.
Although replaced in part by increased rifle shooting activities by the Volunteers, the idea of a revitalised WARA remained just that, an idea. An attempt to form a Western Australian Civil Service Rifle Club in 1892, supported by Captain Richard Adolphus Sholl of the Metropolitan Rifle Volunteers (also the colony’s Postmaster-General and an MP) and other newly elected MPs, was quickly rejected by the newly arrived British commandant, Major Henry S. Fleming (local rank of lieutenant-colonel). Also rejected was the attempt to form a Police Rifle Club in the colony the following year. To his credit, Fleming, although battling with a very small budget for defence, played a major role in encouraging a Volunteer rifle team from Western Australia to compete in the
268 West Australian, 5 June 1890, p. 3. 269 West Australian, 11 July 1890, p. 3. 270 Pilkington later returned to Western Australia and served in South Africa during the Boer War as a Lieutenant- Colonel with the WA Mounted Infantry where he was Mentioned in Despatches and made a Companion of the Order of the Bath. West Australian, 12 May 1900, p. 5, and West Australian, 22 April 1901 p. 5. 15
intercolonial match in Melbourne in 1893. Any impetus that action gave towards a renewed WARA however, was quickly dashed by Fleming’s successor, Lieutenant-Colonel Alexander Wilson, who was to prove quite hostile to the rifle movement in Western Australia.271
The WARA of course was not the only rifle association having problems. While Edwards’ report on defences was being absorbed by colonial governments, and Western Australian volunteer officers tried to establish their own rifle association, the issues between other colonial rifle associations and the General Council of Rifle Associations had continued to fester. In March 1890, the QRA decided to support the NSWRA position on wind-gauge sights. Subsequently, it decided not to hold the intercolonial matches in Brisbane as had been earlier agreed by the General Council.272 The QRA’s resolution, however, was apparently not transmitted to other associations. By July the QRA Council was being flooded by inquiries about the intercolonial match program; the Victorians had begun practicing. The Tasmanians and South Australians were worried about costs and therefore the question of railway passes became the key to help intercolonial rifle teams get to Brisbane. The mood in Queensland was pessimistic; the great shearers’ strike had polarised civil life and the militia had been called out. Militia members of the QRA became involved, such as Major George Patterson, a QRA member and later Queensland delegate to the General Council.273
By that time, the NSWRA was embroiled in its own problems. The Paddington rifle range had finally been closed and the Randwick rifle range was not yet open, so the NSW association had to cancel its own annual matches for that year. Not having a range meant not being able to practice for the intercolonial matches, and of course the question of wind-gauge sights was still not resolved to its satisfaction, so it had two excuses not to attend at Brisbane. It decided against participating anyway.274 Then, in an apparent fit of pique, NSW again refused railway passes to Victoria (it had
271 It would not be until 1901 that not one but two rifle associations were formed in Western Australia and not until 1910 that they unified under a single constitution. D. Birkbeck, ‘History of Shooting in Western Australia’, WARA Rifle News, Vol.31, No.3, September 1991, pp. 6-7. 272 Brisbane Courier, 1 March 1890, p. 6. 273 Brisbane Courier, 17 April 1891, p. 5. 274 Report of the New South Wales Rifle Association 1889, Charles Potter, Govt. Printer, Sydney, 1890, p. 8. 16
agreed to give free passes to Tasmania in 1888) to travel to Brisbane. The Tasmanians decided they would not travel if the Victorians could not and so the intercolonial matches fell through. With that, so did the General Council meeting of that year. NSW had relieved Queensland of the decision to abort the intercolonial matches and effectively torpedoed the General Council; both saw the VRA as the chief villain behind the decisions to stop the use of wind-gauge sights.
The stalemate continued into the following year. In late 1891 and following the conclusion of the intercolonial match in Adelaide, the meeting of the General Council was overshadowed by the continuing stalemate with the NSWRA over the sights issue. Neither Queensland nor NSW sent delegates, and NSW even sent a formal letter to the General Council stating that as they were to host the 1892 intercolonial match in Sydney according to the General Council’s roster, they could neither guarantee that the match would be held or even that they would still be members of the General Council by that time unless their position on sights was accepted.275 Officially, this not too subtle threat was quietly ignored by the General Council members although no doubt there were many private conversations about the problem.
With the deliberate absence of the nominal vice-president, Lieutenant-Colonel Theodore James Jaques of NSW, the General Council meeting of 1891 was chaired once again by Major-General Downes, who had been re-appointed as Commandant of South Australia after an interregnum as Commandant of Victoria.276 New delegates to the meeting included a number of militia officers, along with a British Army staff officer (and crack rifle shot), Lieutenant Colonel Fitzroy Lanyon
275 Proceedings of the Third Annual Meeting of the General Council of the Rifle Associations of Australasia held at Adelaide on September 22, 1891, Burden & Bonython, Advertiser Office, Adelaide, 1892, p. 5 and ‘Report of the New South Wales Rifle Association for the year 1891’, Charles Potter, Govt. Printer, Sydney, 1892, p. 7. 276 Downes was a highly experienced officer and Crimean war veteran who had been commandant in South Australia between 1877-1881 and had just returned from serving on the intercolonial committee of military commandants who inspected areas suitable for fixed defences around Australia. W. Perry, ‘Downes, Major Francis (1834 - 1923)', Australian Dictionary of Biography, Volume 4, Melbourne University Press, 1972, pp. 100-101. 17
Somerset Penno.277 At this time, Queensland was still in the throes of its shearers’ strike, and that and distance militated against QRA attendance. This absence may still have given the appearance, nonetheless, of the QRA siding with the NSWRA in its ongoing dispute with the General Council. The meeting, however, was mostly taken up with the vexed question of railway passes for teams travelling to intercolonial matches.278
The General Council meeting in Sydney in October 1892 was the first where every colony with a rifle association and including New Zealand for the first time, was represented. The NSWRA had thrown open its annual prize meeting to ‘the British Empire’ and so attracted a large group of riflemen looking to win something of the £3,500 of prize money on offer.279 When the NSW association matches got underway, intense lobbying immediately began finally to resolve the question of sights. The issue had to be resolved before the intercolonial match began to be fired, as there was every chance that NSW might cancel the match, even at the eleventh hour, if it did not get its own way. Sights, and the type of rifle to be used, had been an issue since the early 1860s. Now the issue threatened the very viability of the General Council. Although the dispute was a specific one, it was grounded in more general principles. Not everyone agreed with the NSWRA position on wind gauge sights, seeing it as irrelevant, as ‘field firing’ as such was seldom being practiced at rifle association prize meetings. In a lecture in 1892 the commander of one of the partially-paid infantry regiments raised the more general issue:
I should also like to impress the necessity of field-firing. Pot-firing is good enough to begin with, but after the preliminary work the men should be taught field-firing, and I would like to see the Rifle Association give more attention and prizes to squad and company firing. At first the distance should be stated and a certain time given for firing, and by degrees all the desired improvements in the shooting effected.280
277 Penno was a professional British Army officer on duty in Victoria as Assistant Adjutant-General. The Times, 13 July 1908, p. 12 and A.J. Kilsby, ‘Fitzroy Somerset Lanyon Penno (1854-1930)’, Soldiers of the Queen, Issue 149, June 2012, pp. 11-16. 278 Proceedings of the Third Annual Meeting of the General Council of the Rifle Associations of Australasia held at Adelaide on September 22, 1891, Burden & Bonython, Advertiser Office, Adelaide, 1892, pp. 5-7. 279 ‘Report of the New South Wales Rifle Association for the year 1892’, Charles Potter, Govt. Printer, Sydney, 1893, p. 6. 280 H.W. Renny-Tailour, ‘The Land Forces of Australasia and Their Dispositions for War’, Journal and Proceedings of the Royal United Services Institution of New South Wales, Lecture 16, Charles Potter, Govt. Printer, Sydney, 1892, p. 9. 18
While the NSW association moved quickly to introduce ‘battle-firing’ into its annual prize shoots (as did Victoria), it also needed to move quickly to find a solution to the rifle sight question. It was by then under intense pressure, even from within its own ranks, to find a solution. Among other things, the fact that Reserve Rifle Companies (aka military rifle clubs) had been disbanded in 1893 as a cost-saving measure—the Government had also cut the financial assistance to the NSWRA by 50 per cent, or £500—and no new regulations yet formulated to place new civilian rifle clubs into the defence structure also was unsettling for the NSWRA council; it needed rifle club participation in one form or another to make its annual matches a success.281 Yet the NSWRA maintained ‘a considerable difference of opinion on the issue’; as it believed that it would be at a disadvantage to shoot without its beloved wind-gauge sights. At the first General Council meeting held to see if a breakthrough could be made to allow the intercolonial match to proceed, a number of delegates were absent. Key figures were missing, including the president, NSW Commandant Major-General Richardson, who was on sick leave in New Zealand.282 The vice-president, from NSW, was also ‘ill’. Queensland’s delegates were also absent; it was not an auspicious beginning.
All delegates did join a second meeting held a few days later. Almost immediately there was a compromise motion put forward by the NSWRA. ‘After mature consideration [the NSW association] agreed to take part in the match, the majority believing that it would be for the benefit of rifle shooting to do so, and that it would be a graceful act.’283 The motion followed—to shoot future intercolonial matches with the sights approved by the rifle association in the colony in which the match was to take place. A great relief was felt by all, everyone quickly agreeing to the NSW association proposal. Victoria then went on to win the intercolonial match, on a windy day when wind-gauge sights would have been useful. NSW came last of the six teams competing, blaming their loss, naturally, on not having had enough practice with open sights.
281 Report of the New South Wales Rifle Association for the year 1893’, Charles Potter, Govt. Printer, Sydney, 1894, p. 6. 282 Richardson was mentally ill. 283 Report of the New South Wales Rifle Association for the year 1892’, Charles Potter, Govt. Printer, Sydney, 1893, pp. 8-9. 19
At the follow-on General Council meeting, held after the intercolonial match, all the delegates were again present as a new spirit of cooperation permeated, at least on the surface. A range of matters were discussed. Among them, news that free railway passes for all teams regardless of origin and destination for intercolonial matches had been secured; it was a week for compromises of the federal kind. Last of all, the General Council decided to re-name itself as the Federal Council of Rifle Associations of Australasia, printing its meeting report under that name. 284
Despite the issues of the past few years, the Federal Council was gathering confidence under the leadership of Templeton, Davies and Dean. It again met in Melbourne at the United Services Institution in November 1893. Despite the recession, or perhaps because of it, the VRA matches attracted a large number of riflemen from Victoria and around Australia. Military recruiters touted the money to be earned as a Militia man or Volunteer as well as the prizes which could be won as a rifleman as a way of off-setting the hardships of the depression. Private soldiers in the Victorian Militia had their pay reduced by 16 per cent in 1892 and by a further 25 per cent in 1893.285 The intercolonial match saw teams compete from NSW, Victoria, South Australia, and Tasmania and, for the first time, from Western Australia. By now the Martini-Henry was the standard rifle throughout the colonies, and the sights question had been settled in favour of open sights.
The presence of the West Australian team was welcomed. The team arrived early and practised hard; but to no avail. Western Australia had no rifle association, so could not be regarded as members of the Federal Council, and so had no delegates there.286 Queensland found it difficult to get its delegate balance right; by October 1894 there were three area rifle associations in the colony under the QRA, and they did not always agree that the QRA should represent them. So there were
284 Proceedings of the Fourth Annual Meeting of the Federal Council of the Rifle Associations of Australasia held at Sydney in October, 1892, Frederic P. Ridley, Sydney, 1893, pp. 2-9. 285 G.R. Vazenry, Military Forces of Victoria 1854-1967, Ch.2, p. 4. 286 The Western Australian team finished last. D. Birbeck, ‘History of Shooting in Western Australia’, WARA Rifle News, Vol.31, No. 3, September 1991, p. 7. The Federal Council Report of 1893, while regretting that the Western Australian delegates had been unable to attend the meeting, also noted ‘There is not an Association in Western Australia as yet, but it is intended to form one this year.’ Proceedings of the Fifth Annual Meeting of the Federal Council of the Rifle Associations of Australasia held at Melbourne in November, 1893, F. Clark, Sydney, 1894, p. 15. 20
no delegates in 1893 from Queensland. New delegates to the Federal Council that year were as usual, militia officers. As for the New Zealanders, despite their declared intention at the 1892 meeting to send delegates regularly from then on, neither delegates nor subscription made an appearance.
One of the first orders of business for the Federal Council in 1894 was to rename the intercolonial match ‘The Federal Match’. At the follow-on picnic for competitors and delegates, Lieutenant Colonel F.S.L. Penno, as acting president, said ‘Riflemen were showing the genuine federal spirit which would crush out petty jealousies and bring the colonies into a grand Australasian confederation.’287 The sentiments were returned by others there, including South Australia’s rifle team captain David Drysdale, who said ‘That grand consummation would never be achieved until the colonies took a sensible view of the position, and did away with those unconscionable, annoying, restrictive tariff provisions which were more heartbreaking than misses to a marksman.’288 On that political note, the week came to a close for another year, but not without a remarkable footnote in the shape of a Brigade Order from the new NSW Commandant’s office, two months later.
By January 1894 NSW had a new commandant, Colonel Edward Thomas Henry Hutton, with local rank of Major-General.289 A highly influential officer—he had most recently been an aide-de- camp to the Queen herself—Hutton had seen recent active service in Africa and Egypt. He attended the NSWRA meetings in October 1893 and began a series of energetic inspection tours of Militia units, defences and some rifle clubs throughout the colony. As the new president of the NSWRA, and as part of an effort to improve the efficiency of NSW defence arrangements, Hutton also tried to persuade rifle clubs to undertake military drill. This met resistance.290
287 Proceedings of the Fifth Annual Meeting of the Federal Council of the Rifle Associations of Australasia held at Melbourne in November, 1893, F. Clark, Sydney, 1894, p. 14. 288 ibid. 289 A.J. Hill, 'Hutton, Sir Edward Thomas Henry (1848 - 1923)', Australian Dictionary of Biography, Volume 9, Melbourne University Press, 1983, pp. 415-418. 290 Wilcox, C., ‘Australia’s Citizen Army 1889-1914’, Ch.2, p. 8. 21
Quietly, the NSWRA report of 1894 noted that a Brigade Order had been issued from Hutton’s office, ‘disallowing the use of the wind-gauge and moveable sights in matches under military conditions, and adopting the regulations of the N.R.A. as regards sights and the use of lines etc.’291 After fighting so hard for the retention and use of these wind-gauges—and threatening the existence of the fledgling General Council over the issue—the NSW association was left looking more than a little foolish. This did not make the attitude of a number of conservative NSW association members any more amenable towards their arch-rival Victoria. Despite the positive sentiments post-1893 Federal Council meeting, much unhappiness continued to bubble away under the surface, and initial attempts by Hutton to impose his will on the NSWRA added to its general anxiety.
By 1894 the financial status of the Federal Council was also of some concern. The Federal Council was not anywhere near as wealthy as the colonial rifle associations, at least not if the 1894 bank balance of £1/12/11 was any indication.292 The council remained reliant on the annual £5 subscription from individual associations for income. Fortunately there was not at this relatively early stage of its existence much in the way of outgoings. In fact, all of the colonial rifle associations were under financial pressure, dependent as they were for subscription income from rapidly shrinking Militia and Volunteer forces as forced retrenchments due to the deep recession bit into their ranks. In 1891, the six colonies spent nearly £10 million on their unpaid Volunteers, paid Volunteers, voluntary Militia, and small Permanent forces and scattered fortifications. By 1895, the need to restrict government expenditures had reduced this figure by two-thirds.293
The year 1894 was to see progress and pain in equal measure for the Federal Council of Rifle Associations. Military developments were dominant that year. In October 1894 the first quasi- Federal Military Commandants’ conference was held in Sydney. It approved a number of Edwards’
291 Report of the New South Wales Rifle Association for the year 1893’, Charles Potter, Govt. Printer, Sydney, 1894, p. 9. 292 Mercury, 20 December 1894, p. 2. 293 C. Wilcox, ‘Australia’s Citizen Army 1889-1914’, Ch. 2, p. 30. 22
proposals to consider a ‘general scheme of defence applicable to the Australian colonies and Tasmania’.294 In South Australia, the commandant, Colonel Jose Maria Gordon:
hoped to entice sufficient good shots, particularly those with previous military service, into the [defence rifle clubs] until he had a reservoir of trained men which in war he would draw on to complete the strengths of the Active and Reserve companies. The new regulations stated that rifle club members were now liable for military service in wartime, and in peace must wear a uniform. Still, these were considerably looser conditions than those applying in the Active Forces. Furthermore, in return clubs were offered cheap rifles and ammunition. The Colonial Defence Committee had little faith in the usefulness of rifle club members as reserves in war, and suggested Gordon oblige the men to drill. Gordon refused, perhaps aware of the protests and resignations arising from Hutton’s attempts to do so in [NSW].295
It was in this context of increasing inter-colonial cooperation on defence matters and increasing military interest in rifle clubs, and their operations, that the Federal Council met in December 1894 in Hobart, following the TRA matches and the Federal Match. The Victorian team by this year was starting to contain many fine shots who would represent both Victoria and in due course, Australia. Many of them were members of rifle clubs who were now sworn in and so could compete for their colony as bone fidé members of the Defence force. Neither Western Australia nor New Zealand sent teams to the Federal match of 1894. As usual, the meeting was presided over by the local Commandant, in this case Colonel Ashton Henry Warner.296 For the first time, from NSW, a civilian rifle club member joined the Council; the other new faces were all Militia officers, including an officer of the Naval Brigade in NSW.297
At the 1894 Federal Council meeting, Lieutenant Colonel Penno raised an important question: what was a ‘bone fidé member of the Defence Force? He raised the question because apparently some
294 Report of the Federal Military Conference, Charles Potter, Govt. Printer, Sydney, October 1894. 295 C. Wilcox, ‘Australia’s Citizen Army 1889-1914’, Ch. 2, p. 30. 296 Warner’s career was summarized in an obituary in the Mercury, 24 March 1909, p. 5. Warner was an avid rifleman (and had been Supervisor of the Country Rifle Clubs organisation), and took keen interest in the proceedings. Warner had captained the victorious Tasmanian intercolonial team in Hobart in December 1888. 297 Lieutenant Maurice James Keating, of the NSW Naval Brigade had the distinction of not only being a veteran of the NSW Contingent to the Sudan, but also part of the Australian rifle team to Wimbledon in 1886. As a result, he was probably the first Australian rifleman to be popularly known throughout the country. J.E. Corcoran, The Target Rifle in Australia, 1860-1900, Dolphin Press, Hunters Hill, 1975, pp. 157-161. 23
of the competitors in the match were not sworn in Defence Force members; the words ‘and sworn in under the Defence Act of the colonies to which they belong’ was added to the rules. Penno was referring to NSW rifle clubs, some members of which had been included in the NSW team without being ‘sworn in’. In NSW, its rifle reserve companies (rifle clubs by any other name) had been disbanded in 1893, but new Volunteer units authorised.298 The NSW Parliament, however, had not seen fit to announce any new structure to replace the former reserve companies, so rifle clubs were in limbo. The NSWRA, desperately keen to enlist some of its champion shots from rifle clubs into its intercolonial team, paid a call on the Commandant, Major General Hutton, to ask for help. Hutton subsequently requested of the other rifle associations that for this year—and the Hobart matches—the NSW rifle club men be accepted as part of the defence forces of that colony. The rifle associations could not object, but the Victorians wanted to make it clear that it was through their good graces that this was allowed.299 They would not be so generous again.
In fact, the participation of civilian rifle club members in intercolonial teams was a highly contentious matter for some members of the Federal Council. For example, Victoria ‘swore in’ their rifle club members so that they could specifically compete in the VRA competitions and the now Federal Match. Others, like New Zealand, could not field their strongest teams because their civilian riflemen were not considered part of the Defence Force. Indeed, there had been acrimony in Western Australia only the year before when a crack rifleman was refused entry into the Volunteers in order to allow him to shoot with the intercolonial team, partly on the basis that he would not remain in the Volunteers afterwards; Victoria did not have the same attitude.300
It had been hoped that the intercolonial Commandants’ conference, held in October 1894, would provide some clarity or even uniformity about these arrangements. In the end it did not. Rifle Clubs were not mentioned at all in the conference report. What was interesting with regard to the rifle club movement however, was the relative strengths of the types of forces in Australia—1,008
298 A NSW Military Commission in 1892 had thought to make cost-savings in this and other areas of defence. 299 Sydney Morning Herald, 16 November 1894, p. 5. 300 West Australian, 16 October 1893, p. 6. 24
permanent forces, mostly Imperial staff or highly skilled engineers and artillerymen, 7,652 partially paid (or Militia), and 5,045 Volunteers. This was a decade after the apparent disbandment of Volunteers had begun in Victoria and helps to explain the continuing influence of Volunteer or former officers on the rifle associations. Neither Tasmania nor Western Australia had any Militia at all, only Volunteers, mostly because they could simply not afford to pay a Militia.301 One other effect of the continuing recession throughout the colonies was that a rifle team could not be sent to Bisley in the UK to compete in the rifle matches that year.302
The 1895 meeting of the Federal Council, held in Brisbane, was brief. Again, due to the rotation of the meetings through each colony in turn, new faces again appeared at Council. These included the new colonial Commandant in Queensland, Colonel Howel Gunter, who acted as president for the meeting, while the chair was taken by QRA vice-president Lieutenant-Colonel John Sanderson Lyster.303 One regular attendee at the meetings of Council was Victoria’s Templeton, who, now a full colonel, commanded the Militia Infantry Brigade, while other delegates included a civilian rifleman from Queensland, and new Militia officers.304 One of the matters for discussion was to consider the rules for a proposed Australian Military Rifle League.
It was perhaps not surprising that the idea of a purely military rifle association would arrive in due course as military men, including Volunteer and Militia officers on rifle association councils, tried to retain their control of the rifle associations and clubs against the rising influence of civilian riflemen who favoured pure target shooting. At the same time, the professional military staff might also have
301 Report of the Federal Military Conference assembled at Sydney, NSW, October 1894, Charles Potter, Govt. Printer, Sydney, 1894, p. 18. 302 Mercury, 20 December 1894, p. 2. The build-up of frustration over the failure to shoot at Bisley as a combined ‘Australia’ team would lead to some colonies taking matters into their own hands in 1897. 303 Gunter was a highly experienced officer with both active and garrison postings in a number of Empire outposts. D.H. Johnson, 'Gunter, Howel (1844 -1902)', Australian Dictionary of Biography, Volume 9, Melbourne University Press, 1983, p. 142-143. A former British Army officer, Lyster had emigrated to Queensland in 1877, and in 1884 he had returned to permanent military work. McIntyre, D., 'Lyster, John Sanderson (1850 - 1930)', pp. 191-192. 304 The civilian was George Given Ferguson. Ferguson, a veteran railway engine driver, was a well-regarded rifleman with the newly formed Railway, Lands and Works Rifle Club in Brisbane (he had won the Queensland Challenge Cup in 1889). 25
seen in such an idea a way to assert more control over pure military style shooting under service conditions, rather than the deliberate target shooting at long ranges practised in the main by the rifle associations and clubs. A proposal for an Australian Military Rifle League was thus put forward by Captain Oldershaw, Secretary of the NSWRA, at the Federal Council meeting of October 1895.305 Its object, through nationally organised simultaneous matches, was to ‘encourage and promote Rifle Shooting in the colonies and at the same time to bring the whole of the riflemen of Australasia into frequent and friendly competition and bind them together in the same Federal spirit.’ 306
The 1895 Federal Council decided to ask each colonial rifle association to form its own branch of the proposed League and to bring the organisation together formally ‘into one powerful national organisation’ at the 1896 meeting planned for Oamaru in New Zealand. Oldershaw argued that this new organisation would practically entail no expense for the existing associations, ‘while the impetus given to Rifle Shooting will be a great power for good in every way, and especially of largely increasing the entries for matches’ at the rifle association’s annual prize meetings.307 Oldershaw’s proposal was couched in such obscure language, however, it is not surprising that little action was taken by rifle associations before Oamaru. Only Tasmania decided to form a branch. Oldershaw perhaps did not help his case when he suggested that ‘It may be desirable to have a special League match placed on your [association] programme, so that each year the clubs in your colony may meet on the same convincing ground, in a grand test competition. This would naturally swell the numbers for your ordinary matches’, he wrote.308
Attached to Oldershaw’s proposal were suggested regulations. These included an annual one shilling subscription per member, and four simultaneous matches shot throughout Australia each year by teams of five from any unit or rifle club associated with the Defence Forces. What
305 The concept was apparently based on an organisation in Canada of the same name. Canada Military Rifle League Circular No.1, 15 April 1899, Hamilton, 1899, npn. 306 Proceedings of the Eighth Annual Meeting of the Federal Council of the Rifle Associations of Australia held at Oamaru, New Zealand, 16th March 1896, F. Clark, Printer, Sydney, 1897, p. 25. 307 ibid. 308 ibid. 26
Oldershaw’s proposal did not address was who would pay for the ammunition.309 More important, why did a new organisation need to be put in place at all? Overall, the rifle associations in general would have been suspicious of this proposal for a League, perhaps viewing it as competition to their own matches and associations. From the rifle associations’ point of view, the League may even have drawn men and clubs away from the associations at a time when they were only just seeing an improvement in the economy after many years of depression.
Oldershaw further recommended that the Federal Council manage the proposed League, which would no doubt have given concern to some elements in rifle associations who already thought that the Federal Council had too much ‘power’. Somewhat optimistically, Oldershaw had listed among the association secretaries ‘C.Y. Dean, Russell Square, Perth’, as secretary in Western Australia.310 Perhaps a Military Rifle League was the way in which some thought the West Australian officers could establish a rifle association. Later, when Oldershaw was unable to get to the Oamaru meeting, his absence probably explains why the council ignored the proposal and did not discuss it further. The proposed Australian Military Rifle League never became a reality, at least not in the form proposed by Oldershaw.311
It is still unclear today how Oldershaw came to promote the idea of a Australian Military Rifle League. With the death of Sir William Montague Manning in 1895 after 35 years as president of the NSWRA, changes were afoot. The new commandant, Hutton, a veteran of the Anglo-Boer War and keen on reform, became the next president of the NSWRA. Hutton may well have been the inspiration for the Rifle League suggestion, as he was never short of ideas and fostered military oriented rifle clubs and rifle shooting whenever and wherever he could. Hutton’s period as commandant revitalised the NSW Militia and Volunteers, neglected for many years due to the
309 ibid. 310 It would still be some years before a Western Australian rifle association would be formed. 311 Proceedings of the Seventh Annual Meeting of the Federal Council of the Rifle Associations of Australasia held at Brisbane, September, 1895, and of the Eighth Annual Meeting of the Federal Council of the Rifle Associations of Australasia held at Oamaru, New Zealand, 16 March 1896, F. Clark, Sydney, 1897, pp. 25-26. 27
economic depression. He was also keen on federal defence measures.312 Whether the idea of a Military Rifle League had Hutton’s stamp on it or not, it was an idea before its time.
Hutton was no enemy of rifle clubs. On the contrary, he encouraged the clubs in their work by personal visits to rifle ranges during practices and competitions and by the donation of prizes for competition at rifle meetings.313 But he encouraged them with military, not civilian, ends in mind.
Revival of interest in rifle shooting was very evident in 1895 owing to the recent establishment of Civilian Rifle Clubs on favourable conditions, largely due to the efforts of major-general Hutton as Officer Commanding. Civilian Clubs were recognized as useful units in the defence organization and, in an official report, the fact was described as “a really marked commencement of an epoch in the military history of the Colony.”314
With Hutton’s tenure at an end, he was replaced by Major-General George Arthur French in April 1896.315
Meanwhile, in Victoria, civilian rifle clubs were also officially supported, even though they had existed only in small numbers since 1871. In part this was due to the need to replenish the potential pool of recruits for Volunteer and Militia units after depletion of all forces. The recession in turn had compounded the reduction of rifle club membership through VMR and VR recruitment:
Having in view the formation of the Volunteer Reserve from existing Rifle Clubs, which are to be affiliated with the various Mounted Brigade and Infantry units throughout the Colony, the Chief Secretary has been pleased to approve of the formation of Civilian Rifle Clubs in conjunction with the Company Rifle Clubs which now exist in many parts of the country… The civilian members of such rifle clubs, enrolling themselves as Volunteer Reservists, will be
312 A.J. Hill, 'Hutton, Sir Edward Thomas Henry (1848–1923)', Australian Dictionary of Biography, National Centre of Biography, Australian National University, http://adb.anu.edu.au/biography/hutton-sir-edward-thomas-henry- 6779/text11725, accessed 14 June 2013. 313 Perry, E.W.O, ‘Military Reforms of General Sir Edward Hutton in New South Wales 1893-96’, The Australian Quarterly, Vol.28, No.4, December 1956, p. 74. 314 C.H. Cromack, The History of the National Rifle Association of New South Wales, 1860-1956, p. 29. 315 R. Sutton, 'French, Sir George Arthur (1841–1921)', Australian Dictionary of Biography, National Centre of Biography, Australian National University, http://adb.anu.edu.au/biography/french-sir-george-arthur-6247/text10755, accessed 27 July 2013. 28
allotted as the Reserve to the local company…local rifle club[s] will supply the company with a quota of Reservists to complete their establishment in time of war. 316
In South Australia, when a new Defence Act in July 1896 provided for a force of paid troops, soldiers enrolled for two years in the active force and then transferred for a further five years to a reserve force. The former unpaid, purely voluntary elements were relegated to the SANRA, which, however, was to a large measure subject to the military control of the colony.317 Even Queensland, ‘having considered the desirableness of exercising some control over the expenditure of the Association’, had decided to make it a condition of payment of the grant voted for the Association that at least one third of the Council members be nominated by the Government, and that the Chief Staff officer on the headquarters staff should be ex officio Chairman of the QRA.318 Despite these active measures in different colonies, major issues remained. In 1895, for example, the South Australian Commandant stated that the colony did not have enough ammunition to defend itself. Between 1895 and 1899 three colonial Commandants reported that men under their command had never fired a military rifle, either because there was no range available, or because men could not afford to buy their own ammunition.319
The Federal Match of 1896 (the former Intercolonial match) was fired at the seaside town of Oamaru, on the east coast of New Zealand’s South Island, between Dunedin and Christchurch. The associated Federal Council meeting was held before the Federal Match took place, not least to discuss ammunition issues which were threatening the withdrawal of some Australian teams.320
316 ‘G.O.190, 20 September 1895’, Victorian Military Forces: General Orders, Robt. S. Brain, Govt. Printer, Melbourne, 1895, p. 65. 317 H.J. Zwillenberg, ‘Citizens and Soldiers: The Defence of South Australia 1836-1901’, pp. 182-183. This arrangement had administrative shortcomings for the government and in June 1899 the Defence Rifle Clubs’ Association was formed to carry on the functions no longer carried out by the Military Staff Office. The various clubs under this Act became known as Defence Rifle Clubs (DRC). F. Garie, ‘A Brief History of SARA to 1900’, npn. 318 A.T. Jackson, Southern Queensland Rifle Association Jubilee, 1877-1927: a brief History of the Association during the past Fifty Years, pp. 37-38. 319 B. Gammage, ‘The Crucible: The Establishment of the Anzac Tradition 1899-1918’, M. McKernan, & M. Browne, (ed), Australia: Two Centuries of War and Peace, p. 149. 320 Proceedings of the Seventh Annual Meeting of the Federal Council of the Rifle Associations of Australasia held at Brisbane, September, 1895, and of the Eighth Annual Meeting of the Federal Council of the Rifle Associations of Australasia held at 29
Apart from this issue, one of the first items for discussion was the sending of an Australasian team to Bisley. Immediately the New Zealanders demurred on the question of funding the trip, noting that the New Zealand government would not support it. Raising the money remained the largest obstacle. The Federal Council looked to the colonial associations to consider sending a team in 1897, with each colony to contribute two men and £400.321 In the meantime, the colonial associations were also asked to approach their respective governments to see what funds might be forthcoming for such a venture. Pessimism remained among certain influential rifleman that a Federal team would actually be compiled; after all, economic depression notwithstanding, they had been talking about it for years without result.
A long discussion then ensued at the meeting about the Defence status of rifle clubs. NZRA representative Lieutenant Richard Clement Kirk, a member of the Petone Naval Artillery Volunteers and later president of the Petone Rifle Club, noted that New Zealand rifle clubs were not part of the local defence force and so by definition could not shoot in the Federal Match (which also explains in part why the New Zealand Commandant was not invited to be president of the meeting—the NZRA had no relationship with the Defence Force). It was alright for the Australian associations with their ‘sworn-in’ rifle club men, but New Zealand could not compete with them if the Federal Council would not allow their rifle clubs to participate. Unsurprisingly, New Zealand wanted the Council to change the rules; while other council members wanted the New Zealanders to convince their Government to change its rules. NSW pointed out that until recently they were in the same boat as New Zealand and had been competing without rifle club members. Now, club men in both Victoria and NSW were ‘sworn-in’ and allocated local militia regiments. So, although the New Zealand riflemen actually wore the defence force uniform, the rules could not be changed for them.322
Oamaru, New Zealand, 16 March 1896, F. Clark, Sydney, 1897. The meeting was chaired by Major Joseph Reginald Somerville, president of the New Zealand Rifle Association (NZRA). 321 This would be a recurring story for years to come; a Federal team did not go to Bisley until 1902. 322 In an ironic reverse twist, two New Zealand Clubs - Petone and Auckland - had been disqualified in 1893 in Sydney by the NSWRA because they had competed in the annual Rifle Clubs match (Petone actually won the match) with some Defence Force riflemen in their teams, contrary to NSWRA rules. 30
Meanwhile in NSW, several new matches of a service character were placed into the NRA of NSW prize match programme in 1896. These were open to all riflemen, whether ‘sworn-in’ or civilian. They consisted of ‘Running Man’, ‘Vanishing Target’ and ‘Volley Firing’ matches at 300 and 600 yards. The latter was actually won by a civilian rifle club. Battle firing and mounted section matches were also included in the programme.323 In the rival colony of Victoria, Lord Brassey, who arrived in Victoria in 1895 to take up his post as Governor, inaugurated a competition in 1896 for local forces known as the Brassey Field Firing and Marching Competition. This became popular over the next five years with Militia units, both military and naval, as did matches specifically for mounted troops, known as the Loyd-Lindsay and introduced by Lieutenant-Colonel Price to the VRA programme.324
As this chapter has examined, the years between 1888 and 1896 saw major steps forward in the development of the associations and especially at the Federal level. There was discernible momentum, but perhaps not always in the direction intended. There were, for example, the difficulties faced by the General and then Federal Councils over the reluctance of NSW to agree with the other colonies on important standards. There were also the efforts of the military commandants to impose some structure and ‘discipline’, as they saw it, into the rifle associations and clubs. Nonetheless, in almost all cases, the rifle clubs were becoming more military in appearance, evidenced by the links with their local Militia and Volunteer units, match competitions with those units and the ‘swearing in’ of rifle club men, to give some examples.325 At the same time, across all colonies with the exception of Western Australia, rifle club numbers began to rise, even in Victoria where club memberships had been emasculated by the aggressive recruiting of the VMR and the
323 H.E. Mills, The National Rifle Association of New South Wales Official Jubilee Souvenir, 1909 : a History of the past 50 years of Rifle Shooting in New South Wales, p. 32. 324 J.M. O'Connor, Shooting awards and prize medals to Australian Military Forces 1860-2000, p. 86. The Loyd-Lindsay match, originating in England, and which became popular in Australia as well, was designed for mounted riflemen. It was named after Brigadier Robert James Loyd-Lindsay, VC, aka Lord Wantage. 325 For example, when approval was given for a new rifle club in Rocky Hall in NSW, it was to affiliate with the No.3 (Bega Half) Company, Mounted Rifles and ‘K’ (Cooma) Company, 2nd Infantry Regiment. In NSW, rifle club members actually did get closer in appearance as they were obliged to take on the uniform facings of the regiments to which they were attached. ‘General Order 65, 31 March 1896’, Index to General Orders 1896, HQ Staff Print, Victoria Barracks, Sydney, 1896. 31
Rangers. This meant more civilian rifle clubs came into being, even in NSW after the reserve companies were disbanded in 1893. The civilian clubs inevitably wanted more representation at association level.
Concurrently, the push by military commandants to ‘acquire’ what they saw as cheap defence assets, further exacerbated the basic tensions between the highly regulated service shooting required by the military and the more personalized and individual target shooting preferred by the associations and the many Volunteer and Militiamen who comprised their members. Military officers could often not understand why the colonial governments would continue to provide grants and ammunition to target shooters when they, who were actually tasked to defend their colonies, could not find the funds to do so adequately. These tensions were all to come to a head in spectacular fashion in NSW in 1898. The Boer War, which broke out in late 1899, provided experiences in rifle shooting which would vindicate the positions of both sides. It would also lead to an explosion in the growth of rifle clubs across Australia. In Victoria, the growth of such clubs came to be seen as a threat to the military authority itself. The next chapter will examine the growing schism between the civilian rifle clubs and Defence in each colony.
32
Chapter 4
War at home and on the veldt 1897-1900
The year 1897 opened full of promise for rifle shooting across the Australian colonies. A Federal Council was now operating with strong leadership coming to the fore; NSW had rejoined the Council after the issue of sights was finally resolved. Progress had been made, both in Defence and in civilian rifle shooting associations, towards a real sense of purpose associated with feelings of nationalism connected to the impending Federation, albeit within an Imperial context—and 1897 was an especially ‘Imperial’ year, for it marked Queen Victoria’s 60th anniversary on the throne. In general terms, in the period up to by 1897, the development of rifle clubs had gained colonial government support following the Edwards’ reports of 1889, and by and large they were flourishing, with regional variations. Western Australia remained in limbo, mainly due to a small population and financial base—and an unsympathetic military jealous of what little budget it had. The influence of the military on rifle clubs especially in NSW and South Australia grew ever stronger, while in Queensland and Tasmania there remained a strong Volunteer ethos. In Victoria meanwhile, rifle club numbers were slowly increasing once again as they recovered from the poaching of their previous numbers by the Mounted Rifles and Rangers.
Underlying the overall development of the rifle club movement in this period was the steady increase in the number and variety of international matches being conducted, which served to further reinforce riflemen’s sense of federal as well as Imperial connection and influence. In common with the years prior to 1888, rifle matches against visiting Royal Navy crews were a regular occurrence in every colony. Japanese training ships also continued their training visit series every few years. For example, the Hi-Yei visited Sydney and Melbourne in 1891; the Kong-Go visited Sydney in
1
1898; and the Hi-Yei again in 1900.326 There is no record of their crews firing in friendly rifle matches until 1903 and 1906. Simultaneous matches, where clubs in different colonies competed against each other but on their own ranges with results transmitted by telegraph, remained popular. However, these competitions were seen as locally arranged affairs.
On the international front, some 16 years after its one brief appearance at Wimbledon in the UK and Creedmoor in 1886, no all-Australian teams could be brought together from among the colonies. While individual colonial riflemen did compete internationally, like Captain J.W. Castine from South Australia who shot at Wimbledon in 1882, no teams appeared.327 Time and again, the Federal Council tried to develop a scheme agreeable to all colonies before Federation to assemble and despatch a united team to England. At all points, such attempts were thwarted by a combination of the difficult economic times and the lack of intercolonial cooperation on the matter. Colonies could simply not agree on how to divide the costs equitably and select the riflemen—was it to be on the basis of population or equally; how much would colonial Governments contribute to the costs of the venture; and how would the men be actually selected within each colony?
Meanwhile, in 1891 the NRA in England was forced out of its Wimbledon home by encroaching urban development and selected a new range site at Bisley, south-east of London in Surrey. That year, a detachment of the VMR went to England to take part in the Royal Military Tournament. They also participated in rifle matches at Bisley, the first Australians to do so; the VMR contingent had been picked for their rifle skills as much as for their riding skills. Drawn directly and specifically from country rifle club men, at Bisley the VMR came 2nd in the Loyd-Lindsay mounted rifle matches and shot in a number of individual matches, but without much success.328
326 Sydney Morning Herald, 28 December 1891, p. 4, Sydney Morning Herald, 7 June 1898, p. 4 and Sydney Morning Herald, 26 April 1900, p. 6. 327 Australia did not appear as a unified team internationally until 1902. 328 Argus, 30 May 1891, p. 9. 2
The catalyst for Australian colonial participation in rifle shooting in England in 1891 had been encouraging comments made by Lieutenant-Colonel F.S.L. Penno, an Imperial officer serving as Assistant Adjutant-General for the Victorian Military Forces. Penno, a first class shot in his own right and active in the VRA (he would captain Victoria five times in intercolonial competitions), suggested that the time was right for a team to compete in England.329 In early 1897 though, new moves to send an Australian-wide rifle team to Bisley ended in failure. Although money remained at the heart of the issue, the greater problem was the inability of the colonies, yet again, to cooperate on a matter of ‘national’ interest. In the end two colonies—Victoria and Queensland—sent teams, leaving NSW in particular to stay behind nursing grievances real and imagined. Those grievances again resulted in NSW pulling out of the Federal Council in July 1897.330 Meanwhile the Federal Council had played no role at all in organising, dispatching and managing the Victorian and Queensland teams in England; it would surely have done so if the colonies had been able to agree on an all-Australian team.
The year 1897 held particular significance for the NRA as it was the Diamond Jubilee celebration of Queen Victoria. The Imperial Secretary of State for the Colonies, Joseph Chamberlain, had issued a formal invitation to military contingents to represent the colonies at the grand parade for the Queen in London on 23 June. His invitation also included, on behalf of the NRA, the wish that colonial riflemen from around the Empire would attend the Bisley matches from 13 June.331 Victorian and NSW politicians watched each other to see how many men the colony across the border would send and how much money they would need to provide to send them. The NRA of England further complicated matters by stating that a combined Australian team could not compete in the team competition for the great Imperial prize – the Kolapore Cup – on the basis that Australia was not yet federated.332 When it became clear that individual colonies had to fund their own teams, the minds of colonial treasurers turned, as always, to questions of cost. The colonial governments of
329 Argus, 9 May 1890, p. 9. 330 Report of the National Rifle Association of New South Wales, NRA of NSW, Sydney, 1897, pp. 6-7. 331 Sydney Morning Herald, 1 February 1897, p. 5. 332 Age, 23 February 1897, p. 4. 3
Queensland, NSW, Victoria, South Australia and Western Australia all sent military contingents to England, along with Premiers and colonial delegations to the Imperial conference to be held in London. Only Tasmania did not send a contingent, given the expense of sending its Premier. So the question of providing extra money for rifle teams, even for those in charge of government coffers in the richer colonies like Victoria and NSW, became a real issue.
The NRA of NSW soon started selection trials for its own Diamond Jubilee Bisley team, at first subsidised by the NSW government. When private subscriptions did not come up to expectations, the government agreed to fund virtually the whole team. But remarkably, the Commandant in NSW and concurrent president of the NRA of NSW, Major-General G.A. French, then interceded and persuaded the NSWRA council that it had left it too late and in any case, they were sure to be beaten by the other colonies who had longer practice lead times.333 So NSW pulled out and did not send a team. French perhaps had other motives behind his attitude. He was unhappy with the rifle association council in NSW. As subsequent events were to prove, French may have already been planning to restructure the NRA of NSW to conform to his own ideas on how it should be managed and run. He certainly did not desire, even as its president, for the rifle association to win any prestige for a Bisley team if he was to succeed with his plans.
In Victoria, the VRA despaired that it could afford to send a Jubilee team at all when the Government refused even to subsidise costs (the cost was estimated at £2,000—although the Queenslanders went with only £1,500). It was saved, however, by the generosity of the Age proprietor, David Syme, who donated the funds.334 In Queensland, the government subsidised public subscriptions pound for pound. South Australia talked about fielding a team, but never managed to arrange for a rifle shooting team, leaving some of its Mounted Rifle contingent to the Diamond Jubilee to visit Bisley only as spectators.335 In Western Australia, the question never really
333 French had previously been Commandant in Queensland. 334 Argus, 25 February 1897, p. 5. 335 A.J. Kilsby, Lions of the Day, A. Kilsby, Melbourne, 2008, pp. 25-26 and A.J. Kilsby, The Bisley Boys, A. Kilsby, Melbourne, 2009, p. 26. 4
came up at all. Across the Tasman, the NZRA, which had managed to avoid paying even a £5 subscription to join the (Australian) Federal Council, briefly considered sending two representatives to join the Australian team. But events moved quickly and New Zealand, feeling ignored by the Australians (as it was), decided to send its own team to Bisley, with a pound for pound government subsidy against public subscriptions to meet the costs.336
When the Diamond Jubilee Kolopore Cup competition—the only team match where colonial teams could compete directly against the British Army teams—was fired in England, Victoria triumphed over six other teams from around the Empire (including the British Army team). New Zealand came in a close second (despite not being able to select rifle club men) with Queensland a little further behind.337 A number of men who had been, or would be, delegates to the Federal and later Commonwealth Councils, attended this competition at Bisley with their teams, gaining valuable insights and experience in international competitions as well as administration of ranges and major prize meetings in England. In addition, there was the major opportunity to rub shoulders with thousands of like-minded riflemen and discuss rifles, ammunition, marking and scoring, targets, positions, sights, range set-ups—the whole gamut of rifle shooting competition. Despite the success in Bisley in 1897 (or perhaps because NSW was not part of that success), NSW had once again pulled out of the Federal Council. But Victoria (but no other Australian colonies, or New Zealand) went back in 1898 to defend the Kolapore Cup victory from the previous year. This time, however, the Victorians came in a close second to Guernsey.338
By late 1899, NSW returned once again to the Federal Council, but just when it seemed set that an Australian team might finally come together for the 1900 Bisley matches, the effort was scuppered by NSW, which this time played a military duty card, namely:
336 Sydney Morning Herald, 10 April 1897, p. 9. 337 A.J. Kilsby, The Bisley Boys, A. Kilsby, Melbourne, 2009, pp. 43-45. 338 The Victorian team was headed by Captain Theodore Stanley Marshall, an educator and former captain of the Carlton Football Club (and a post-Federation delegate to the national rifle associations’ council). 5
That, in view of the serious aspects of affairs in South Africa, and the fact that a call is now being made by the Government for a further contingent of troops for service there, this [NRA of NSW] Committee deems it inopportune and inadvisable to take any further steps towards sending a team of riflemen to compete at Bisley, inasmuch as every good shot available should first consider his duty to the Empire. 339
The Boer War and NSW’s intransigence once again intervened in 1901; in 1902 an Australian team competed at Bisley for the first time. It is against this background of petty bickering and struggles between the powerful colonial rifle associations for influence on the national and international stages that an examination of the developments in the defence sphere should be made, for while the Federal Council of Rifle Associations struggled to advance its interests, the various colonial Commandants were busily advancing theirs.
In 1897 a Victorian Military Forces General Order was issued amending the Regulations for Rifle Clubs and authorizing the formation of a Rifle Clubs Reserve to supplement the Militia and Permanent Forces. The incentive for rifle club men to join this new force was free ammunition during the stipulated four days of annual training at Fort Queenscliff, and an additional issue of 100 free rounds if they were ‘efficient’ by attending the prescribed annual musketry course. Members of the Rifle Clubs Reserve were to be distinguished by the wearing of the letter “R” in brass on their uniform collar. 340 This blatant attempt to corral the rifle club men into the Victorian military structure was an abject failure—of the 45 officers and 685 other ranks who attended the Easter Camp at Fort Queenscliff and Swan Island that year, only one officer and six other ranks attended from the Rifle Clubs Reserve.341 In 1898 the situation was little better—one officer and 14 other ranks of the new Rifle Clubs Reserve at Queenscliff and Swan Island out of 47 officers and 906 men in Easter camp overall.342
339 Report of the National Rifle Association of New South Wales for 1899, F. Clarke, Sydney, 1900, p. 6. 340 ‘G.O.7, 23 January 1897’, Victorian Military Forces: General Orders, Robt. S. Brain, Govt. Printer, Melbourne, 1897, pp. 12-3. 341 ‘G.O.41, 16 April 1897’, Victorian Military Forces: General Orders, Robt. S. Brain, Govt. Printer, Melbourne, 1897, pp. 114-118. The commanding officer of rifle clubs stated that the poor attendance was due to the cost of uniforms. 342 ‘G.O.29, Easter Camp Ballarat’, Victorian Military Forces: General Orders, Robt. S. Brain, Govt. Printer, Melbourne, 1898, p. 102 and ‘Camp Order No.3, 31March 1899’, Victorian Military Forces: General Orders, Robt. S. Brain, 6
NSW took a different approach to Victoria in trying to incorporate civilian rifle club assets into its defence structure. It decided to affiliate rifle clubs with militia units throughout the colony. For example, in March 1897 a civilian rifle club at Mount Kembla was approved and affiliated to “B” (HQ) Company of 2nd Infantry Regiment, while in April a new civilian rifle club at West Wyalong was approved and it was affiliated to “C” (HQ) Company, of the 1st Infantry Regiment.343 This was both an economic decision as much as one of control as there were limited rifle ranges approved for the burgeoning rifle clubs which had to share them with military units (not always happily). In turn this gave the military a certain measure of control over the activity of the rifle clubs as well as of the rifle ranges needed by the clubs to sustain themselves. In addition, the NSW rifle clubs were issued extra ammunition allowances for every member of the club who was also a reservist.
In most colonies, the military tried to bind the rifle clubs ever closer to defence through the use of train travel concessions, especially for country clubs. In Victoria for example:
Members of RCs who have been sworn in under the Defences and Discipline Act can procure a ticket to enable them to travel free on Country Lines to or from the range next adjacent to their respective clubs on the certificate of the Captain or Sec. of their club, stating that they are proceeding for the purposes of bone fide rifle practice or match duly authorized by the Head- Quarters.344
Colonel Price, as Commander of Rifle Clubs, inspected the clubs regularly through 1898, no doubt with VMR recruitment first in his mind. But although rifle clubs in Victoria were not formally affiliated with militia units, they were designated in General Orders as conducting rifle practice on the same days as their local militia units, presumably to share range resources more efficiently. Meanwhile in South Australia, frustrated with the sociable class firing musketry practices held in ‘a
Govt. Printer, Melbourne, 1899, p. 91. Matters did not improve in 1899 - one officer and eight other ranks from Rifle Club Reserves from 40 officers and 847 ORs in camp. 343 ‘G.O.57, 22 March 1897’, NSW Military Forces: General Orders 1897, Head Quarter Staff Print, Sydney, 1897, npn, and ‘G.O.69, 7 April 1897’, NSW Military Forces: General Orders 1897, Head Quarter Staff Print, Sydney, 1897, npn. 344 ‘G.O.63, 17 June 1897’, Victorian Military Forces: General Orders, Robt. S. Brain, Govt. Printer, Melbourne, 1897, pp. 169-175. 7
picnic atmosphere’, the colony’s military Commandant Major-General Downes, back in South Australia after a short period as Victoria’s Commandant, ‘endeavoured to turn the ardour for rifle shooting into a useful military exercise by introducing vanishing targets. There is no evidence that this, perhaps somewhat “unsporting”, practice found a great deal of favour.’ 345
In Queensland, efforts to ‘militarise’ the rifle clubs had a different flavour. Captains of rifle clubs were announced in General Orders and Militia officers were appointed to the councils of district rifle associations. The Queensland Commandant, Colonel H. Gunter, actually encouraged the Queensland Defence Force to attend the annual meetings of the QRA. In a General Order issued in September 1897 he stated:
The Commandant urges the Officers of Corps to endeavour to create more enthusiasm by organizing Company teams to compete in the Rifle Clubs match. The result would among themselves no doubt be most satisfactory, and would create a desire to reach a higher standard of efficiency in shooting, which should ever exist among troops armed with the rifle.’346
By July 1899, the Queensland commandant was also offering small cash prizes for ‘Special Military Shooting Competitions’ among Volunteer units.347 In Tasmania, riflemen also faced efforts by successive Commandants to gain closer control of the emerging civilian rifle clubs and where possible, bring them under their respective defence structures. In the second half of 1897, the new Auxiliary Force of country rifle clubs found itself reorganized and amalgamated into the new Tasmanian Regiment of Infantry.348
345 H.J. Zwillenberg, ‘Citizens and Soldiers: The Defence of South Australia 1836-1901’, pp. 355-6. 346 ‘G.O.245, 29 September 1897’, Queensland Land Forces – General Orders 1-340, Edmund Gregory, Govt. Printer, Brisbane 1897, npn. 347 ‘G.O.218, 6 July 1899’, Queensland Land Forces – General Orders, Edmund Gregory, Govt. Printer, Brisbane, 1899, p. 16. 348 D.M. Wyatt, With the Volunteers: A Historical Diary of the Volunteer Military Forces of the North-West and West Coasts of Tasmania 1886-1986, p. 20 and A Lion in the Colony: An Historical Outline of the Tasmanian Colonial Volunteer Forces 1859-1901, p. 44. 8
In October 1897, a treatise called The Federal Defence of Australasia was published in Sydney. The author waxed lyrical about the efficacy of the rifle clubs: ‘The Rifle Clubs Reserves are now a formidable force in Australasia’, the author wrote, ‘and with sufficient drill and discipline they could be made cohesive enough to hold a fort, shelter, or entrenched position. Rifle clubs, if specially drilled in simple formation—of course in shooting well and bayonet exercise—would help to decide a battle. Let Clubs be formed and disciplined.’ 349 The reality was somewhat different. As the colonies tried to militarise their colony’s rifle clubs, the Federal Council of Rifle Associations was faced with its own issues of control. It certainly was not, consequently, engaging with the military Commandants—who were also then presidents of their respective colonial rifle associations—over the issues surrounding use of civilian rifle clubs within defence structures.
The problem for the Federal Council remained NSW which, in October 1897 at the next meeting of the Federal Council in Adelaide, again withdrew from the council. The NRA of NSW Secretary, Captain Foskett, had sent a letter to associations in July which said in effect that until there was a Federation, there was no point to a federated union of rifle associations. Mainly the NRA of NSW was piqued that Victoria and Queensland had sent teams to Bisley under their own auspices, while NSW had had the chance but failed to do so.350 The mood at the Federal Council meeting was subdued. It seemed that once again NSW had succeeded in throwing a new obstacle in the progress march of the Federal Council. Not only that, in what could be construed as a direct challenge to the Federal Council, the NRA of NSW had announced just weeks before the Federal Match in Adelaide that it intended to hold at its annual prize meeting a new international team match along the lines of the Kolapore Cup. It would be open to men from around the Empire, with substantial prizes and would be called the Australia Cup match.351
349 G.C. Craig, The Federal Defence of Australasia, George Robertson and Co., Sydney, 1897, pp. 273-5. 350 Argus, 28 July 1897, p. 9 and Report of the National Rifle Association of New South Wales for the year 1897, Charles Potter, Govt. Printer, Sydney, 1898, p. 17. 351 Report of the National Rifle Association of New South Wales for the year 1897, Charles Potter, Govt. Printer, Sydney, 1898, p. 6. 9
Meanwhile, trouble in the shape of a powerful military enemy was brewing for the NRA of NSW. It quickly became a crisis. The origins of this crisis lay in the recent past. In early 1895 the esteemed president of the association, Sir William Manning, KCMG, died after 35 years in the role. The NSW Commandant, Major-General E.T.H. Hutton, replaced Manning as NSWRA president. Hutton was keen on rifle clubs only in so far as the role they could play in local defence. Following the disbandment of the Reserve Rifle Companies in NSW in 1893, Hutton recommended a reorganized force structure. The new organisation recognised ‘Civilian Rifle Clubs’ if they would have their members ‘swear-in’ with the oath of allegiance so as to be bone fidé defence force members (even though they still managed to avoid drill). Hutton had also proposed to the NSWRA in late 1895 that military and civilian representation on the Council of the association be proportionate.352 While the vice-presidents contained many military men in their number, it was the Council of the NSWRA which actually ran it—an ‘old guard’ of long-serving, former Volunteers and, increasingly, civilians who themselves were often former Volunteers. The NSWRA Council ‘old guard’ promptly buried the proposal, but it would come back to haunt the Council later.
When Hutton finished his appointment as Commandant in early 1896, he was replaced by Colonel (local rank Major-General) George Arthur French. French had not been in favour of Volunteers when he was previously Commandant of the Queensland Defence Forces between September 1883 and August 1891, but in NSW, Volunteer forces actually expanded during his tenure as Commandant. Moreover, French actively supported rifle shooting and participated in rifle competitions himself from time to time.353 In fact, he showed a keen interest in everything to do with musketry, even inventing his own targets which he offered to the NSWRA for use and donating a silver prize for the ‘battle-firing’ competition of the annual matches.354 It was at French’s urging that new military style matches were included in the 1896 programme of the re-named NRA of
352 Report of the New South Wales National Rifle Association for the year 1895’, Charles Potter, Govt. Printer, Sydney, 1896, p. 60. 353 Sydney Morning Herald, 20 September 1884, p. 8. 354 Report of the New South Wales National Rifle Association for the year 1896’, William Applegate Gullick, Govt. Printer, Sydney, 1897, p. 7. 10
NSW, which included a ‘Running Man (Continuous) rapid firing and a volley firing match.355 Overall, French’s past reputation and current practice as an apparent friend of the rifle shooting movement put the NSW association at ease.
However, French was notably absent from the October 1897 annual matches of the NRA of NSW. Seemingly coincidentally, a dramatic falling-off in the number of teams entering for the military matches of the annual meeting made it apparent to everyone but the NRA of NSW that something was going on. The military was also irritated by the small prize money allocated by the association to the military matches, but these were just the visible signs of a growing military antagonism towards the association. French’s attitude towards the rifle association would have been widely known to his military and political supporters. The content of his annual report to the NSW Parliament in June 1897, released in 1898, nonetheless, took the NRA of NSW by complete surprise. In his report, French directly criticised the association riflemen as ‘pot-hunters’, essentially elitist marksmen who were not trying to improve general military musketry standards for the bulk of the militia or volunteers:
In no other form of sport that I know of, are such facilities provided by Government for its enjoyment. The “pot-hunter” is not an ideal sportsman in any line; but in the line of rifle shooting in New South Wales, he must have approached as nearly to the Pot-hunter’s Paradise as is possible on this sinful earth. A paternal Government gives him a rifle to shoot with, free ammunition to use with it, a free railway pass to and from the shooting grounds, even if hundreds of miles from his own residence, and then very handsome cash prizes to reward his skill. Finally, if a master in his art, he may look forward to a trip to England on the simple condition that he takes the prizes, and some one else foots the bill.356
It was not, however, as if this was new. It was no coincidence that Oldershaw’s proposal for a military rifle league came out just a year after the first colonial Commandants’ Conference in Sydney in 1894. The message was clear—the Commandants wanted service conditions for shooting in rifle
355 Report of the New South Wales National Rifle Association for the year 1896’, William Applegate Gullick, Govt. Printer, Sydney, 1897, p. 6. 356 ‘Military Forces of the Colony - Report for the year ending 30 June 1897’, Votes and Proceedings of the Legislative Assembly during the session of 1897, Vol. VII, William Applegate Gullick, Govt. Printer, Sydney, 1898, p. 11. 11
association matches, to improve the effectiveness of the rifle clubs as a potential defence asset.357 For example in September 1895, Colonel Gunter, the Queensland Commandant, said at a rifle association prize-giving:
He had been told that there was no need for regular defence in Australia – that all that was wanted was a swarm of sharpshooters. A rifleman who lay down at 900 yards with his rug, vernier, and box of appurtenances, was not necessarily a sharpshooter. In addition to range practice, they required field practice and field firing, and he would like to submit to the council of the association that it would be well to lay more stress on this feature.358
Perhaps what was new was the NSW Commandant was determined to back up his words with action. Following the release of his report to Parliament in 1898 which contained his criticisms of the rifle associations in NSW, in early 1898 French established a military committee to report on the subject ‘Rifle Shooting under Active Service Conditions’. It was a thinly disguised vehicle to attack the NRA of NSW. Unsurprisingly, its findings criticised the rifle association and demanded changes. These included the right by the Commandant to veto matches and approve association match programmes, have the books audited by the Government, and, most important of all, to change the structure of the association council by having 12 officers appointed directly to it by the Commandant.359
The rifle association tried to retain its independence and appealed for support from other colonial associations and clubs. It even appealed directly to the Premier for relief from French, only to be forced to hand over the three main military matches and half the Government subsidy to the Commandant. 360 When the NRA of NSW issued its amended programme for the October annual matches in 1898, it was again criticised severely by French, who took ‘exception to other conditions
357 Brisbane Courier, 27 September 1895, pp. 4-5. The Commandant’s conference of 1894 proposed a joint colonial defence scheme. See Report and Summary of proceedings together with Appendices and Minutes of the Federal Military Conference assembled in Sydney, New South Wales, to consider a General Scheme of Military defence Applicable to the Australian Colonies and Tasmania, Govt. Printer, Sydney, 1894. 358 Brisbane Courier, 30 September 1895, p. 2. 359 Sydney Morning Herald, 9 February 1898, p. 7. 360 The NSW Government made it clear whom it supported when it subsequently extended French’s term by for a further two years, until March 1902. 12
in deliberate shooting and caused further friction, culminating in the entire withdrawal of our ammunition grant and railway concessions.’361 From this point, free ammunition was only to be used for service matches and grants of public money to the rifle association were only to be made under stringent conditions.362 Altogether it was a major rupture in relations between the military and the rifle association, splitting the membership of the rifle association into factions. The NRA of NSW took years to recover from it. The newspaper war in NSW was reflected in other colonies as some prominent riflemen defended the status quo while Commandants and their proxies pushed for reform.
The friction in NSW did not diminish as Federation approached. Early in 1899 French established a Defence Forces Rifle Association with the Governor as patron, in direct competition with the NRA of NSW, and invited civilian rifle clubs to affiliate with it.363 The questions raised by French about, and his reaction to, the efficacy of the NRA of NSW would have direct implications for the rifle club movement as a whole and consequences for the Federal Council. The involvement of many riflemen as volunteers in colonial and Commonwealth contingents to the Boer War, which broke out in 1899, would underpin the future debate as to whether individual sharpshooters or massed rifle fire was decisive in war.
Against such a background of controversy and acrimony the Federal Council meeting of 1898 took place in Sydney in an atmosphere of high drama. The NRA of NSW, already under siege from its own president, Major General French, and his supporting military men, fought on two fronts as it continued its other battle with the Federal Council of Rifle Associations. As it was, in 1898 both matches were scheduled to be held in Sydney and at first the NSW association did nothing to make any arrangements for the Federal Match. All colonies (except Western Australia) were represented in
361 C.H. Cromack, The History of the National Rifle Association of New South Wales,1860-1956, p. 32. 362 H.E. Mills, The National Rifle Association of New South Wales Official Jubilee Souvenir, 1909 : a History of the past 50 years of Rifle Shooting in New South Wales, p. 35. 363 ‘Notice, 3 March 1899’, NSW Military Forces: General Orders 1899, Head Quarter Staff Print, Sydney, 1899, npn and ‘G.O.55, 19 May 1899’, NSW Military Forces: General Orders 1899, Head Quarter Staff Print, Sydney, 1899, npn. 13
the Australia Cup—even New Zealand put a scratch team into place led by its champion shot Captain William Henry Ballinger—but not as representatives of their respective rifle associations. New Zealand did not enter a team in the Federal Match.
As if external pressures were not enough, internal warfare broke out within the NRA of NSW. One faction desperately wanted to compete in the Federal Match. The other faction, led by Longfield, considered that the Australia Cup Match was sufficient to replace it as an intercolonial competition. Before the Federal Council met late in the week beginning 19 October to consider the key question was whether the NRA of NSW would rejoin the Federal Council or the Federal Match (scheduled for Monday 24 October), the pro-Federal NSW faction passed a resolution to rejoin the Federal Council, only to discover that they did not have a majority within the rules. So they instead resolved to ask Captain William Alfred Leggatt and Lieutenant Bernard James Newmarch from among their number to act as their delegates to the Federal Council.364 As NSW had pulled out from the Federal Council, its current president (French), chairman (Longfield) and Secretary (Oldershaw) did not appear at its meeting. So Templeton from Victoria took the Chair, and Lieutenant Colonel J.G. Davies from Tasmania took the Secretary role. The meeting was pleased that two delegates attended from NSW, but equally disappointed that the NRA of NSW had not agreed to rejoin the Council. Later, French apologised for his absence, and promised that NSW would take part in the future.365
Reporting back to a special meeting of the NRA of NSW, its delegates Leggat and Newmarch found considerable opposition to the idea of re-joining the Federal Council: ‘Several leading …members contend that, as the local Council is stronger than all the others put together, it has everything to lose and nothing to gain by its re-entry to the Federation, which is regarded to be of
364 Sydney Morning Herald, 16 March 1929, p. 18. Newmarch, a Macquarie street surgeon who had served in the NSW Naval Brigade before joining the Army Medical Corps, was also an enthusiastic rifleman. Newmarch later served with distinction in the Boer War and World War One, retiring as a Lieutenant-Colonel. 365 Sydney Morning Herald, 20 October 1898, p. 6. 14
really no practical use to rifle shooting.’366 Then, in extraordinary scenes, the pro-Federal faction proposed that an informal rifle team compete for the Federal Match. Longfield refused a meeting to consider the proposal. The faction posted a list of individual riflemen it had selected for the Federal match, only to have it torn down on Longfield’s order; ‘Subsequently, violent altercations took place between several members.’367 The informal team decided to shoot anyway, as a protest, and came within a few points of actually winning the match, which was taken out by Queensland.
A further meeting of the Federal Council was held at Coogee, again with Templeton in the chair, this time focusing on international matches. One of its important resolutions that night was to agree that colonial governments should be approached to help to send an Australian team for Bisley each year by providing financial support on the basis of population in each colony. It also agreed that visiting teams from Canada would fire their matches in the colony where the Federal Match was being fired—this step, presumably, taken to avoid giving status to NSW’s Australia Cup Match.368 In any case, in early November, an emotional reconciliation meeting took place at the NRA of NSW when Longfield was persuaded not to resign and the association joined ranks against its biggest threat—Major-General French.
By mid-1899, with the next Federal Council meeting and Federal Match scheduled to finish off the round of VRA annual matches in November 1899, the Federal Council made renewed efforts to persuade the NRA of NSW to rejoin the council. In a letter to the NSW association in August 1899, Lieutenant Colonel J.G. Davies urged it to come back to the fold so as to give itself a voice on deliberations to form a Federal rifle team for Canada and Bisley, for which negotiations were under way. The colonial Premiers had agreed to support a Federal team with financial support based on the population of each colony. Yet, as a body, the council of the NRA of NSW, despite some members wanting an immediate agreement to rejoin the Federal Council, decided to wait until their September meeting to discuss it further while they obtained more information. They did not think
366 Wanganui Herald, Volume XXXII, Issue 9572, 20 October 1898, p. 3. 367 Thames Star, Volume XXX, Issue 9207, 24 October 1898, p. 4. 368 Sydney Morning Herald, 24 October1899, p. 3. 15
that the NRA would allow a Federal rifle team to compete at Bisley while Federation was still some time away. But by early September, the sentiment among members of the NRA of NSW to re-join the Federal Council was overwhelming and a resolution to do so was subsequently and overwhelmingly endorsed.
While these domestic disputes were being fought out in NSW, the outbreak of the 2nd Anglo-Boer War, or as it was more popularly known, the Boer War, in October 1899 gave a popular boost to the activities of rifle shooting around Australia, especially in Victoria, where rifle club numbers had been already been steadily growing. By June 1899 there were already 2,562 riflemen in that colony compared to 1,565 a year earlier. Now, right across the colonies, a wave of patriotism in support of the ‘Mother Country’ generated an unprecedented interest in rifle shooting. 369 Tens of thousands joined existing rifle clubs and hundreds of rifle clubs were formed through to the end of the war in May 1902.
During the Boer war, the growth of civilian rifle clubs across Australia was nothing short of phenomenal, especially in Victoria. ‘The stirring events of the year’, enthused the VRA report for November 1900:
emphasize the wisdom of encouraging rifle shooting as a necessary element of our National defence…In particular, Rifle Clubs to the number of 330 have been gazetted, and at the present time Victoria possess a line of defence comprising some 19,000 riflemen, animated with a desire to qualify themselves as marksmen.370
In the patriotic, Empire-centric society that was Australia at the time of the Boer War, it is no surprise that rifle club membership boomed, especially in Victoria where civilian rifle clubs were by far the most numerous. By comparison to Victoria, by December 1900, NSW boasted a mere
369 Report of the Council of Defence [Victoria], Robert S. Brain, Govt. Printer, Melbourne, 1899, p. 16. 370 Report of the Victorian Rifle Association meeting, 1900, Paul A. Hewitt, Melbourne, 1900, npn. 16
1,906 members of its civilian rifle clubs.371 Nonetheless, rifle shooting was the popular way to demonstrate support for the Empire and it was available to almost anyone—even women were allowed to form clubs, albeit to fire a small calibre rifle. It was not surprising therefore that ordinary citizens flocked to rifle clubs to demonstrate their patriotism.372
Possibly hundreds of rifle club members volunteered to join one of the colonial and later, after Federation in January 1901, Australian contingents to South Africa. However the exact number will never be known with any degree of certainty. There are a number of reasons for this. Before Federation, men enlisted in colonial units and the roll books were kept by those regiments, and not by Government. Attestation papers were not collected and stored in archives. Even after Federation, at the very beginning of the public service bureaucracy, many individual records did not survive, and the quality of detail varied widely between the States.373 Cross-checking nominal rolls with rifle club rolls also cannot yield useful results for the two hardly ever exist for the same place and time. And then men, when they enlisted, rarely indicated that they had had rifle club service, as indicated in the introduction to this thesis. All that can be said is that where men enlisted who had had previous military service, especially in the colonial contingents, it is likely that they had had rifle club experience of some sort or another.374 At a time when there were apparently high numbers of gun-owners, it could equally be said that most recruits, even from the cities with no previous military experience, probably had had some experience with firearms (whether that meant they could actually shoot was another matter altogether).
371 Year Book Australia, No.2, Section 28, Defence, Australian Bureau of Statistics, Canberra, 1909, p. 1076. 372 This was to be repeated during World War One. It seems that rifle clubs was a popular way for ordinary citizens, many of whom apparently had no intention of enlisting themselves, to show that they were supporting the effort overall and to demonstrate that they were doing something of a quasi-military nature. 373 Many Queensland papers do not even have a section regarding previous military service, for example. 374 In an analysis of the 25 men who formed the South Australian contingent to the Queen Victoria Diamond Jubilee in 1897, for example, 16 served in the Boer War, some in both colonial and Commonwealth units, and all 16 had seen previous service in the Militia and all had been in Militia rifle clubs. Kilsby, A.J., Lions of the Day: The South Australian Contingent to Queen Victoria’s Diamond Jubilee 1897, A.J. Kilsby, Melbourne, 2008 17
While exact numbers of rifle club men who enlisted for service in South Africa may never be known, the number who served who had been colonial delegates at the meetings of the Federal Council of Rifle Associations since 1888, can be determined. Two died on active service. Colonel C.E.E. Umphelby from Victoria was, ironically, killed by rifle fire in March 1900, and Major M.G. Hipwell from South Australia died from enteric fever (typhoid) in 1902.375 Other delegates of the Federal Council saw active service, some with distinction. These included Lieutenant Colonels E.T. Watchorn from Tasmania, K. Hutchison and J.S. Lyster from Queensland and N.W. Kelly from Victoria (who was seriously wounded in action), Majors E.T. Wallack from Tasmania and J.J. Byron from Queensland, Captains C.J. Reade and A.E.M. Norton (who won a DSO) from South Australia and Captain B.J. Newmarch and Naval Reserve Lieutenant A.F. Stephens from NSW.376 As well, A.E. Monsborough from Victoria served as a Lance-Corporal with Victoria’s 5th Contingent—the only identifiable rifle club man to do so although many of the contingents would have been with rifle clubs before becoming mounted rifles. Lieutenant-Colonel George Patterson from the QRA Council even went to war as a correspondent.377
The war also generated controversy with regard to the ongoing issue of military control of rifle clubs. The debate began in NSW by Major-General French as to the relative value of individual marksmen in war and the need to practice under conditions as close as possible to active service, was reignited. The Boer commandos, individualistic, hardy and country-bred, could ride a horse and fire a rifle with equal skill, and in the early days of the war especially, were responsible for the defeat of several regular British Army forces. The comparative skills of the colonial mounted infantry, especially when compared to the British regular army, were eulogized:
375 South African battlefield historian Garth Benneyworth has examined the demise of Umphelby in his unpub. manuscript ‘Lt Colonel Umphelby, Australia’s highest ranking Boer War casualty, recovering his history and heritage’. 376 Hutchinson had been appointed Staff Officer for and Inspector of Rifle Clubs on the HQ Staff of the Queensland Defence Force from 1 July 1899. ‘G.O.209, 6 July 1899’, Queensland Land Forces - General Orders, Edmund Gregory, Govt. Printer, Brisbane, 1899 (July-December), p. 15. 377 Brisbane Courier, 24 June 1911, p. 7. 18
Expert in the handling of the rifle, and dexterous in the management of horses, a few weeks training soon fits [the Australians] to take the field, and the lack of regular training is adequately compensated for by their mutual willingness, their enlightened zeal, and their dogged determination.378
The scene was thus set for a great post-war debate, with the rifle shooting movement squarely in the middle. Interestingly it was French in NSW who issued the following General Order in December 1899: ‘The [General Officer Commanding] wishes it intimated that Reservists and men of [Civilian Rifle Clubs] are eligible to volunteer for Active Service in South Africa provided they are good shots, good riders, and otherwise fulfill the requirements promulgated in GO 139/99.’ 379
With the country gripped by war fever, the Federal Council met in Melbourne in November 1899. For the first time in many years, all of the active colonies (that is, less New Zealand and Western Australia) were present for the Federal Match. Since Victoria and Queensland had already won the McGregor Challenge Cup four times, 1899 was the deciding match of the series (and the first to be shot with the new .303-inch calibre rifles, making it a small-bore match, albeit of a military type). That NSW had rejoined the Council was additional good news. With Federation looming there was a palpable air of anticipation among colonists everywhere, not least among riflemen who had worked towards achieving the federal ideal in their own General and Federal Council of Rifle Associations. Yet the year 1900 was to show how difficult it was to achieve the ideal.
At a ‘smoke social’ (a dinner interspersed with speeches, musical interludes and other entertainments) for the visiting Federal Match teams put on by the VRA, the main toast was instructive of the mood. Colonel Templeton proposed ‘The Commonwealth of Australia’, and ‘referred to the fact that the opening of the 20th century would also be the birth of a federated Australia’.380 He was proud to think that the Federal Council of the Rifle Associations had done
378 A.W. Andrew, Rifle Fire and the Higher Individual Training of the Soldier, Thacker & Co., London and Bombay, 1906, p. 17. 379 ‘G.O.140, 18 December 1899’, NSW Military Forces: General Orders 1899, Head Quarter Staff Print, Sydney, 1899, npn. 380 Argus, 18 November 1899, p. 14. 19
good work in the cause, having begun their federal work in 1888.’ 381 At the Federal Match two days later, Queensland won emphatically, and the McGregor Challenge Shield was theirs. The other VRA matches were shot with the Martini-Henry rifle, for the last time. The long reign of the .303-inch calibre magazine rifles was beginning.382
In the same year, in Victoria, Colonel Price finally relinquished his unpaid role as Commander of Rifle Clubs in 1900. The Government appointed Colonel Templeton, former Commander of the Infantry Brigade and member of Victoria’s Local Defence Committee (and now Chairman of the VRA) to replace him, with duties laid down in revised Defence Force regulations which gave Templeton the status of a commanding officer. 383 Templeton, who had been brought back from the reserves to the role, relished his new authority and moved quickly to organise the colony’s civilian rifle clubs along the lines of regimental rifle clubs. An ardent imperialist, Templeton skillfully exploited his accurate analysis of the patriotism and enthusiasm for rifle clubs to ‘inaugurate the rifle club movement’ whose citizen soldiers had now gained new respect. Further, in a mass meeting of rifle club men at the Melbourne Town Hall on 27 July 1900, Templeton gave an enthusiastic speech entitled ‘The Rifle Club Movement: a distinct factor in the defence problem’ and declared that the rifle club movement was ‘born in the hearts of the people’:384
The civilian club is wholly the field of the individualistic theory, while the military theory is that of socialism. A good general average is the height of military ambition; individual excellence that of the rifle club’s. Both are right. They are distinct phases of the same problem, and are natural polarities in effective rifle shooting. 385
381 ibid. 382 The Martini-Henry had one last gasp as the rifle of choice (or rather, necessity) when the Federal Match in 1900, fired at Hobart, used that rifle because Tasmania simply could not acquire enough of the new .303-inch rifles to be competitive. The other colonies agreed to use the Martini-Henry one more time. Mercury, 21 December 1900, p. 3. 383 The Australasian United Service Gazette, 7 January 1898, p. 3 and the Defence and Discipline Act 1890, [Victoria] Part 1: Revised Regulations for Rifle Clubs 10 July 1900, Robert S. Brain, Govt. Printer, Melbourne, 1900, pp. 3-4. 384 J.B. Campbell, The Rifle Club Movement: a distinct factor in the defence problem, Metropolitan Rifle Clubs Association, Fraser & Jenkinson, Melbourne, 1909, p. 11. 385 ibid, p. 11. 20
Templeton’s meeting was accorded full recognition, attended by the Lieutenant Governor, the Victorian Premier, the Minister for Defence, Members of Parliament including Sir Frederick Sargood and Alfred Deakin, Captain Collins [a Royal Navy officer and Secretary of the new Department of Defence] and prominent Militia officers. Templeton’s speech was later printed and issued as a pamphlet. 386 In hindsight, however, the whole declaration of the rifle club movement seems overdrawn, and so it must have seemed to some of the establishment figures who attended that night. By war’s end, Templeton had more men under his command than the Victorian commandant. By comparison, in Western Australia, while Volunteers increased in number, attempts to form rifle clubs fizzled out, mainly due to the antipathy or active discouragement of the military establishment.387
While the rifle club movement was growing in strength and influences, particularly in Victoria, the last formal meeting of the Federal Council of Rifle Associations was held in Hobart in December 1900, twelve years after the General Council of Rifle Associations of Australasia held its inaugural meeting there in 1888. In some respects little had changed; in others enormous changes had come about within the rifle shooting movement (as it was now being called). Federation was close at hand, with the impending Commonwealth celebrations planned for Sydney in January, yet to the Federal Council of Rifle Associations it seemed that despite the personal enthusiasm for Federation of the colonies held by most riflemen, a truly ‘Federal’ council was even harder to achieve.
Back on the competition front, the Federal Match of 1900, about to be shot and won by NSW, was without teams from Queensland, Western Australia, South Australia (no funds) and New Zealand. The Queenslanders, after agreeing that the match could be fired with Martini-Henry rifles, had then decided it could not send a team on account that the rifle was now obsolete. At the same time, the NRA of NSW had made a unilateral declaration that it would hold a major ‘Commonwealth Match’ series as part of the celebrations. Relations between the NSW association
386 Argus, 28 July 1900, p. 14. 387 D. Birbeck, ‘History of Shooting in Western Australia’, p. 7. 21
and the Federal Council were still tenuous. In January 1901, within days of an intercolonial agreement being reached for paying for a Federal team for England and the team selection process finally agreed, NSW once again pulled out of the arrangement, using the need to focus on the war as its reason.388 With only a partial Federal Council at hand, and with the Commonwealth celebrations literally only weeks away, it could be understood that the Council was distracted. Many of its more assertive delegates were away or serving in South Africa.
This chapter has examined how, in the period 1897-1900, the fortunes of the rifle club movement waxed and waned in each colony. Those fortunes changed in line with the relationship with the local Commandant, how closely the rifle clubs were either co-opted or co-operated with the Militia units, and the strength of the rifle associations’ leadership. What was clear by the time the Boer War began in late 1899 however, was that the rifle clubs had become much closer to their colonial defence establishments than perhaps they had ever imagined they would have. On the other hand the explosion in the growth of civilian rifle clubs during the Boer War, in effect, re- asserted their sense of independence from the military, particularly so in Victoria. The consequences of this would be felt in the coming years.
However, despite the momentous changes of the period under examination, by May 1901 the Federal Council – which would rename itself as the Commonwealth Council of Rifle Associations (CCRAA)—could look back with pride on how far it had come since 1888. It had overcome numerous challenges. It had provided leadership, especially to the smaller rifle associations. It had proven willing to compromise to achieve the objectives of the organisation, accommodating the interests of civilian rifle clubs and the military. And it had laid the foundations for what were to be perhaps its best years before the spectre of global conflict changed everything. With a new Commonwealth Defence Minister in place and a new Commander-in-Chief of the Australian Military Forces soon to arrive, the rifle-shooting movement of more than 50,000 riflemen around the country appeared to be on the crest of an unstoppable wave of popularity throughout the country:
388 Report of the National Rifle Association of New South Wales for 1899, F. Clark, Sydney, 1900, p. 6. 22
It is daily becoming more recognized that good shooting is, perhaps, the most essential qualification of an efficient soldier, therefore great attention should be devoted to his training in the art of Rifle Shooting; and it is needless to point out that, in the event of war, or an invasion of our shores, the men who are expert or reliable shots would be of great value. 389
However, the new Commander-in-Chief would have a different outcome in mind. Not everyone agreed with the role that the rifle club movement had apparently awarded to itself, or liked its self- proclaimed independence.
389 ‘An Old Victorian Rifle Shot’, The Australasian Register and Notes on Rifle Shooting, Sands and McDougall Ltd., Melbourne, c.1900, pp. 5-6. 23
Chapter 5
The general sets his sights 1901-1904
This chapter will examine the impact of the new Commander-in-Chief, Major General Sir Edward Hutton, upon the shape and future organisation of the rifle club movement as he developed the new Australian Army with limited resources. Hutton saw the rifle clubs as one of those resources; the rifle clubs did not see it the same way. It was to be a struggle between implacable progress (Hutton) and conservative caution (the rifle club movement).
The opening of the first Commonwealth Parliament in Melbourne in May 1901, along with the end of the Boer War a year later, saw the popularity of the rifle club movement and of rifle shooting at an all-time high. Despite the issues, and at times, serious acrimony that had marked the passage of development of the early General and Federal Councils of Rifle Associations, the Federal Council looked forward to a progressive and expansive future. Australian teams began to compete again on the international stage for the first time since 1886, with remarkable success, winning the Kolapore Cup two years in succession in 1902 and 1903.390
At the national level, State rifle associations also continued to flourish. Western Australia finally established rifle associations. In addition, in January 1901 as part of the Australian celebrations in Sydney for the formation of the Commonwealth of Australia, the NRA of NSW held a major series of Commonwealth Matches.391 Over 1,000 riflemen attended these matches from around Australia and internationally, competing for over £4,800 of prizes. Overall, the rifle extravaganza was a huge success and the NRA of NSW clearly saw itself as the pre-eminent rifle association in Australia, or
390 The Kolopore Cup was the ‘holy grail’ for Australian marksmen at Bisley - it was a long-range team event which could be entered by any team from the Empire and allowed ‘civilian’ riflemen under the guise of reservists to participate as well. See A.J. Kilsby, The Bisley Boys, A.J. Kilsby, Melbourne 2009. 391 Formerly the Federal Match. 1
even of Australia. Now more than ever, the NRA of NSW saw no reason to recognise the authority of the Federal Council of Rifle Associations in any shape or form.
Turning a blind eye to the attitude of the NRA of NSW, in April 1901 Lieutenant Colonel J.G. Davies, the long-serving secretary of the Federal Council, wrote to the new State rifle associations inviting them to attend a special meeting of the council in Melbourne in May to coincide with the opening of Federal Parliament.392 The purpose of the meeting was to discuss how, with the Commonwealth Government taking over colonial defence functions, to obtain the same concessions from the Commonwealth Government previously granted by the former colonies for train travel, ammunition and operating money grants, etc. The NRA of NSW made an immediate and dismissive resolution in response:
That the chairman be requested to inform the other associations that this council holds that any federal council of Australasia has no power to deal with the matter of obtaining a grant from the Federal Government, and that this association consequently cannot see the necessity of appointing delegates as suggested…393
The NSW Council then appointed a committee ‘to deal with the question of the assistance to be obtained from the Federal Government, and arrange, if necessary, for a deputation to wait upon the Federal Minister for Defence for the purpose.’394 In other words, NSW felt that it could and should deal directly with the new Federal Minister for Defence, John Forrest, a former premier of Western Australia. The other state associations (apart from NSW, and Western Australia which was still in the process of forming its association) however, responded positively to the Federal Council, each sending delegates to the meeting in May.395 A number of resolutions were passed in 1901 which included to form a new Commonwealth Council of Rifle Associations of Australia (CCRAA) made up of two delegates from each State regardless of population, to request of the Federal Minister for
392 The Federal or Commonwealth Parliament met in Melbourne from 1901 to 1927, before moving to the new national capital at Canberra. 393 Sydney Morning Herald, 15 April 1901, p. 3. 394 Sydney Morning Herald, 15 April 1901, p. 3. 395 See, for example, ‘VRA Minutes’, 15 April 1901, VRA Archive, Bendigo, npn. 2
Defence for ongoing funding of rifle association and international shooting matches and activities, and to ask for the issuance of a certain number of free railway passes to attend interstate rifle competitions.396 Colonel Templeton met with the new Minister of Defence, Sir John Forrest, on 15 May 1901, strongly advocating these resolutions. It was not until 25 July, however, that the formal reply was received—the Minister proposed not to do anything until the new Defence Act had been passed by Parliament and the new Federal Commander-in-Chief of Australia’s military forces had been appointed.397
Meanwhile, the rifle club movement’s relations with the defence establishment remained cordial and cooperative on the surface despite a growing and essentially fundamental divergence of views over the ‘ways and means’ to support the rifle club movement. The appointment of Australia’s first Commander-in-Chief would be an important step in the development of the fledgling national defence structure (including rifle clubs), and the announcement of the incumbent was widely anticipated by Militia and Volunteer officers alike. The anticipation was also mixed with uncertainty, however, for the defence structure at Federation was in some ways similar to that of the rifle club movement—superficially homogeneous but actually with different levels of development and divergent attitudes and traditions at work in each of the former colonies, now States.398
In July 1901, the NRA of NSW received a letter requesting delegates to attend the annual meeting of the Council in Brisbane in August (in part to confirm the new name and direction of the CCRAA). The NSW association responded by withdrawing, once again, from the Council on the grounds that, ‘with the achievement of Federation, a Federal Council was no longer necessary.’399 Needless to say, NSW sent neither rifle team nor delegates to the August meeting of the CCRAA. Remarkably, it did not even bother recording its withdrawal from the council in its 1901 annual
396 Mercury, 26 August 1901, p. 4. 397 Mercury, 18 January 1902, p. 4. 398 A.J. Stockings, The Making and Breaking of the Post-federation Australian Army, 1901-09, Study Paper No.11, Land Warfare Studies Centre, Canberra, 2007. 399 Sydney Morning Herald, 5 July 1901, p. 3. 3
report. Despite the attitude of the NRA of NSW the momentum, however, was with the new CCRAA.
The first post-Federation meeting of the CCRAA in Brisbane in August 1901 was both an important and historic occasion, for it set the parameters of the new national council of rifle associations for the foreseeable future. The change to Commonwealth control was unsettling for all rifle associations, both in the short term and the long term. In the short term they were not sure of where and when their next grant for their own annual match series might come from. Questions about supply of modern rifles, cheap ammunition and the ever-important question of rail passes for interstate match teams were also pressing. In addition, with a new Defence Act under discussion, the formal status of rifle clubs, state associations and the CCRAA itself was undetermined. An early version of the draft Defence Act had proposed an Australian Rifle Association; rumours swirled through the State associations that they would be placed directly under the control of the Federal Minister of Defence.400 Questions as to who the new Commander-in-Chief might be and what attitude he might hold towards the rifle club movement remained a mystery.
The nominal president for the inaugural CCRAA meeting of 1901 was Queensland State Commandant Colonel Henry (‘Harry’) Finn, a professional British Army officer considered to be a friend of the rifle movement. With Federation, Finn was in demand as the weighty matters of determining Federal Defence regulations imposed on the time of all senior commanders. Consequently, Finn was regularly absent from Queensland and he was unable to attend the first meeting of the CCRAA in Melbourne. In the chair as vice-president of the meeting was Lieutenant Colonel Kenneth Hutchinson, who had returned from South Africa a few months before where he had commanded the 2nd Queensland Mounted Infantry Contingent. Delegates from Western Australia, New Zealand (NZ) or NSW did not appear. The NRA of Western Australia (NRA of WA)
400 Advertiser, 9 July 1901, p. 9. 4
was just getting underway.401 New Zealand, ostensibly a member of the Council, had ignored it since 1896 while NSW, as noted, had decided to walk alone. At the CCRAA meeting:
Colonel Templeton, in particular, made a thoughtful speech, in which he pointed out that the support of New South Wales was not absolutely essential to the successful working of the council, and urged that the accomplishment of Federation was the best reason for the continuance of the Federal Council. He believed that the action of the Sydney Association in withdrawing was not endorsed by the rifle shots of New South Wales in general. 402
The General Officer Commanding (GOC) of the Military Forces of the Commonwealth was to be ex officio president of the Council; he would have a ‘deliberative as well as a casting’ vote. The commandants of the military districts (the former individual colonies) were to be the ex officio vice- presidents of the State Councils, with a vote (and if in the chair, a casting vote as well).403 Various other procedural changes were made to rules to reflect the new arrangements with the Commonwealth. A sum of £15,000 was requested to be voted to the council ‘to be expended on international and interstate matches, and in aid of rifle associations, in such manner as the said Council may decide, subject to the approval of the Right Honourable Minister of State for Defence’.404 For his part, Queensland delegate Alexander Ferguson did not think they had asked for enough. He was also concerned that Queensland did not receive less in the forthcoming grant than it had received previously from the Queensland Government. His stance was understandable— Queensland at the time had three rifle associations to cater for.405 Meanwhile the CCRAA’s bank balance was not exactly overflowing; it presently held only £4 16s 9d, so the anticipated Federal Government grant was on everybody’s minds.406
401 The NRA of WA was formed in July 1901, and a Goldfields Rifle Association got underway in Kalgoorlie and held the first prize meeting in WA since Federation in July 1902. See D. Birkbeck, ‘History of Shooting in Western Australia’, WARA Rifle News, Vol.31, No.3, September 1991, pp. 6-7 and ‘The Goldfields Rifle Association’, WARA Rifle News, Vol.32, No.2, June 1992, pp. 5-7. 402 Mercury, 26 August 1901, p. 4. 403 At this stage the new GOC was not yet appointed; the appointment of General Sir Edward Hutton was announced in November 1901. Brisbane Courier, 27 November 1901, p. 5. 404 Mercury, 18 January 1902, p. 4. 405 Brisbane Courier, 17 August 1901, p. 5. 406 ibid. 5
The CCRAA was further concerned by a clause in the draft Defence Act which proposed an ‘Australian Association’ and urged the Minister for Defence ‘that action should be taken so as to see that the clause should be altered to embody the existing constitution of the Federal Council, so far as representation is concerned.’407 The concern here may well have been driven by the situation with NSW; the CCRAA wanted to ensure that nothing changed which might encourage NSW to become entirely independent. A committee of three was appointed to go through the standing CCRAA rules and alter them to adopt the language used in the proposed Defence Act.
While the CCRAA was trying to organise itself in anticipation of change under the new Commonwealth jurisdiction, defence commentators generally were also looking to see how the Commonwealth would manage the transition to a new Federal army and defence structure. An editorial in the Australian Army & Navy Journal, in December 1901, noted that ‘there is much diversity of opinion as to its composition.’408 More particularly there was a ‘very considerable party which is entirely in favour of leaving the defence of the country to partially-trained volunteers and the rifle clubs.’ The editorial went on to say:
In the different Australian States there is much diversity of method in the organisation and administration of rifle clubs. The [NSW] system differs from the Victorian, and so on. The former was introduced by General Hutton, and is, perhaps, the most faulty of all. It is lax and quite unjointed, and the same may be predicated in a great or lesser degree of rifle clubism in all the other States.409
The editor may well have regretted this untimely criticism of Hutton given the announcement that Major General Sir Edward Thomas Henry Hutton would be Australia’s new Commander-in-Chief— and ipso facto, the new president of the CCRAA.410
407 Mercury, 18 January 1902, p. 4. 408 The Australian Army & Navy Journal, 18 December 1901, p. 51. 409 ibid.
6
Hutton had impressed many during his first appointment to Australia in 1893 as NSW Commandant as a singularly determined officer. Since then Hutton had re-organised the Canadian Militia system, commanded colonial troops in the Boer War (including Australian troops) and been equerry to the Queen. Now he was Australia’s first General Officer Commanding (GOC), its Commander-in-Chief. No stranger to controversy with his civilian masters, Hutton nonetheless was ready and willing to make major changes to Australia’s new Commonwealth defence forces. The rifle clubs were part of his plans to develop fully Australia’s new defence forces.411
Throughout 1902 Hutton was busy re-organising the Australian defence force and preparing for Australia’s first Defence Act. New Rifle Club Regulations would follow. Federation created a huge amount of work for various government bureaucracies across the whole country as the consequences on law, rules and regulations began to have an impact, including on the rifle club movement. After 1901, the administrative demands on the CCRAA also increased accordingly. In March 1902, at a CCRAA committee meeting Hutton chaired, he took the opportunity to enunciate his views on rifle- shooting at length to the representative and senior rifle association delegates from across Australia.412 Hutton was supported by CCRAA Vice-President Major General M.F. Downes, who was about to retire from his position as Commandant in Victoria.413
Hutton picked his moment well, for he had before him the very group he wanted most of all to impress his opinion upon. The Argus newspaper reported Hutton’s comments in detail, noting that: Hutton said that he would strongly advocate rifle shooting in Australia… He would be particularly favourable to the association if that body was prepared to act according to his views. [emphasis added] The development of rifle shooting must be on a larger and broader basis than has hitherto
411 A.J. Hill, 'Hutton, Sir Edward Thomas Henry (1848–1923)', Australian Dictionary of Biography, National Centre of Biography, Australian National University, http://adb.anu.edu.au/biography/hutton-sir-edward-thomas-henry- 6779/text11725, accessed 17 June 2013. 412 West Australian, 6 March 1902, p. 8. 413 W. Perry, 'Downes, Major Francis (1834–1923)', Australian Dictionary of Biography, National Centre of Biography, Australian National University, http://adb.anu.edu.au/biography/downes-major-francis-3439/text5241 , accessed 7 March 2012. Downes had been brought out of retirement to become Commandant in Victoria in 1899 with the outbreak of the Boer War. He retired in March 1902. 7
existed in Australia. It must be practised and carried on after the manner and under the conditions that practical soldiers know to be necessary.
He would impress upon all that rifle shooting was not to be regarded in any way as a sport. The object of Government aid to encourage rifle practise was to provide suitable men to act in defence of the Commonwealth [emphasis added], and it was necessary for the various associations and the Commonwealth Council in particular to see that this military assistance was used to the best advantage. What he desired to do was to bring the art of rifle shooting up to date.
Hutton had plenty of ideas:
What he wished was that the soldiers of the Commonwealth should be trained in the scientific aspect of rifle shooting. The day of firing at fixed targets was now passed. …What he would recommend was practise at moving and disappearing objects at unknown distances… He would recommend was miniature rifle practice, or Morris tube shooting, as it was called. ...He was prepared to offer a prize of £100 for a shooting and riding contest, to be carried on under the auspices of the council. He advised the introduction of young blood into the council, with up- to-date ideas and a practical knowledge of rifle shooting… If the council was prepared to carry out his views, he would give the rifle movement every assistance in his power, officially and unofficially [emphasis added].414
On that day Hutton made his case clearly—a new era had dawned and how the rifle club movement, the State associations and the CCRAA responded would determine their fate. Hutton meant to bring change and he had set his sights on what he saw as the old guard in the rifle associations. Hutton followed up his comments to the CCRAA Committee with a Minute to the Parliament on the defences of Australia, in which he said:
The rifle clubs at present constituted in some of the States are organised on sound lines, and their members form a reserve to existing military units. In at least one instance, however, rifle clubs form an organisation apart, which, without officers, without military instruction, and without a system of military organisation can at best provide only a certain number of partially-armed men with an uncertain use of the rifle. The military value of such men as an integral part of the defence forces of Australia can be but small under the existing conditions, and this system requires modification. 415
414 Argus, 6 March 1902, p. 6. 415 ‘Military Forces of the Commonwealth - Minute upon the defence of Australia by Major-General Hutton, Commandant’, p.6., Commonwealth of Australia Parliamentary Papers, Vol. II, Robt. S. Brain, Govt. Printer for the State of Victoria, Melbourne 1902. Also see the Argus, 24 April 1902, p. 7. 8
In the period leading up to Hutton’s tenure as GOC, the NRA of NSW had been largely cowed by the deliberate program of intimidation against them by their own president and State commandant Major-General French, who had succeeded Hutton in 1896. Rifle clubs were affiliated with local militia units and service shooting, with moving targets, had been instigated. At first, the NRA of NSW thought that it had a friend in Hutton, but as the CCRAA (and the State associations) quickly began to appreciate, Hutton wanted direct control of the rifle clubs and associations. He would attempt to gain this, as French had done in NSW from 1896, by using the three weapons at his disposal—Government grants, railway passes, and ammunition. He, like French, would demand a return from the Government aid to the CCRAA while simultaneously moving against the older, former Volunteer officers running the State associations and the CCRAA itself.416
Next Hutton turned his attention to controlling the Victorian rifle clubs and the VRA. Victoria had an especially strong, and growing, rifle club movement. The last Report of the Victorian Council of Defence before Federation stated:
Owing to the great enthusiasm excited by the war in South Africa there has been an enormous increase of membership, and the strength which on the 30th June, 1899, was 2,652, is now (on 19 July 1900) 14,200, and many more clubs are in the course of formation…Members of rifle clubs are not required either to drill or procure uniform.417
As the Boer War came to a close in mid-1902, numbers in rifle clubs in Victoria kept climbing. By 18 July 1901, membership in Victorian rifle clubs leapt to 20,800 (and this out of 29,251 for the whole of the country, to which NSW only contributed 1,908).418 With these numbers the rifle clubs had more men in them than the militia and Volunteers combined. Moreover, in the ongoing debate about the form of the new national army, ‘Templeton, whose position as Victoria’s senior citizen
416 It was probably no coincidence that stories of rifle club abuse of railway passes started to emerge in the press along with cuts to ammunition grants at about the same time that Hutton was trying to bring the rifle associations under his control. 417 ‘Report of The Council of Defence’, p. 9, Victorian Parliamentary Papers, Vol. II, Robt. S. Brain, Govt. Printer, Melbourne, 1900. 418 ‘Statement of Strengths - Defence Forces of Commonwealth 18 July 1901’, Commonwealth Parliamentary Papers - House of Representatives, Vol. II, 1901, Robt. S. Brain, Govt. Printer for the State of Victoria, 1901. 9
soldier and commander of its 20,000 riflemen allowed him to speak with authority, argued for a citizen army with only a few Permanent officers as advisers, and with a generous number of unpaid Volunteers and supported by rifle clubs independent of headquarters.’419 A report quoted in the Argus (itself quoting the Brisbane Evening Courier), noted that the acting Defence Minister, Sir William Lyne, had declared:
that the clubs must be placed under the control of the military element in the defence forces. They would be under separate regulations, but they must be handed over to the control of the Federal Commandant. It was pointed out to the Minister that members of the House of Representatives, when discussing the Defence Bill on the second reading, had emphatically declared in favour of maintaining the civilian character of the clubs and keeping the members thereof free from military drill, discipline, red tape and gold lace.
Sir William Lyne replied that he did not intend to run counter to the sentiment indicated. It would however, be impossible to permit the existence of a body of about 20,000 as part of the country's defences working outside military control. He had not general Hutton’s scheme before him, so could not go into details.420
Hutton’s first step to bring the Victorian rifle club movement under firm military control was to retire Templeton from the Militia and therefore as Commander of Rifle Clubs in Victoria, from mid-1902.421 Under a cost-cutting umbrella, he then moved an age-retired but trusted officer from NSW, Major Morris Marian Boam, to become Secretary of Rifle Clubs under Lieutenant-Colonel Godfrey George Howy Irving, the Deputy Assistant Adjutant–General (DAAG) in Victoria.422 The Victorian rifle men, dismayed at this turn of events, appealed to their MPs and other supporters in Parliament. Hutton responded to pressure in Parliament by temporarily delaying Templeton’s departure until later in the year and tried to mollify opposition to his actions by placing Irving in charge overall.423
419 C. Wilcox, ‘Australia’s Citizen Army 1889-1914’, Ch. 4, pp. 11-12. 420 Argus, 26 July 1902, p. 4. For details of Lyne, see Cunneen, C., 'Lyne, Sir William John (1844–1913)', Australian Dictionary of Biography, National Centre of Biography, Australian National University,
Nonetheless, true to character, Hutton was not to be deterred. He was publicly supportive of rifle shooting, but on his terms. Unable to attend the Adelaide annual meeting of the CCRAA in August 1902, with Lieutenant Colonel J.S. Lyster, the newly-arrived Commandant in South Australia, in the chair, Hutton sent suggestions to that meeting to consider, one being that representation on the CCRAA should be based on population. NSW, now back in the CCRAA, strongly supported this for obvious reasons.424 When NSW tried to force a vote for acceptance it was rejected by the Council—Hutton may have seen that as a rejection of his own support for the motion and even as evidence that the Council was working against him.
A new executive committee of the CCRAA was subsequently formed, nominally headed by Hutton himself. There were no delegates from Western Australia at any of these meetings. Meanwhile the NRA of NSW, newly returned to the CCRAA, offered delegates and a rifle team to shoot in the Commonwealth Match. Contrarily, earlier in the year and after years of discussion between the colonies and now States, it also pulled out of an Australian rifle team for Bisley in the UK just when it was finally agreed to send one. To NSW’s chagrin for not being part after all, the rifle team at Bisley had won the Kolapore Cup in Australia’s first foray into international shooting since Wimbledon in 1886.
In late November 1902 the CCRAA executive committee met with Hutton in Melbourne to discuss the future of rifle shooting. The scene was altogether different now to 1901. The CCRAA was, on the one hand, looking to protect and preserve or even expand its position by trying to adapt to Hutton’s view of rifle shooting. On the other it was also trying to retain its independence. It avoided antagonizing the GOC by pushing back to Hutton for decision the question of whether representation of the States upon the council of the CCRAA was to be equal or according to population. Hutton was also asked to decide on the role of the CCRAA in controlling the votes
424 Register, 19 September 1902, p. 4. 11
(grants) provided by Parliament for rifle clubs.425 In a press interview in December 1902, Hutton again expounded his views on rifle shooting:
My idea is to gain the hearty co-operation of the expert riflemen, so that they will apply their scientific knowledge and lengthy experience to the different conditions now proposed to be superadded to the old time-honoured style of firing at fixed targets. I hope, that by co- operation and goodwill between riflemen, the one hand, and the militia and volunteers on the other; an altogether higher standard generally of shooting throughout the Commonwealth will result. It is small use for a State to have a few expert shots. It is necessary, if we are to have a sound defence system, that the knowledge of and skill in shooting should be generally disseminated, and not be confined to an expert few. 426
Hutton was offering an olive branch to the rifle associations, willing them to join him in his crusade to make rifle clubs and rifle shooting a real asset and support to Australia’s nascent defence structure. But he underestimated the innate conservatism of the rifle associations and the influence of the civilian ethos upon their culture (especially in Victoria).
Suspicion within and between the rifle associations about the unstated intent and potential impact of Hutton’s actual plans continued to grow through 1903. The associations were increasingly uneasy that Hutton intended to ‘militarise’ them and reduce support for their normal activities. This unease was intensified by continued criticism from the respected Templeton of the Federal Government’s lack of support for Bisley teams. By extension Templeton was highlighting Hutton’s apparent failure to persuade the Government to provide funding.427 It might have been coincidence that Hutton refused to agree that the Government might be swayed to support a Bisley team at the very time when rifle association opposition was increasing to his proposed rifle club regulations. Meanwhile, Hutton’s relationship with the Government, never warm, progressively deteriorated through 1904, with consequences for Hutton as shall be seen.
425 Argus, 20 November 1902, p. 6. 426 West Australian, 6 December 1902, p. 5. 427 In April 1903, Templeton issued a public pamphlet concerning the despatch of an Australian rifle team to Bisley. In a typically sweeping tour de horizon of the rifle club movement, laced with patriotic appeals and highlighting the important role that rifle men played in Defence, Templeton called for public support to raise funds to send the team. J.M. Templeton, Rifle Associations and the Commonwealth Council of the Rifle Associations of Australia, the Argus, 4 April 1903, p. 18, and the Brisbane Courier, 18 April 1903, p. 11. 12
In January 1904, Hutton circulated a draft of the new rifle club regulations for the State Commandants to use as a discussion vehicle for gauging the reaction of the associations and clubs. Once the detail was revealed, opposition to Hutton, which had been building for some time, exploded. Hutton proposed that the associations become advisory bodies directly to him at the Federal level and to the commandants at the State level while placing rifle clubs directly under military control.428 Templeton led a public campaign against the new regulations as far as they affected the CCRAA and the State associations. In a letter to the Argus in January 1904, Templeton argued that while rifle clubs were always part of the military system one way or the other, the associations were entirely civilian and entirely independent of the military, noting that: ‘At various times through its history attempts have been made by the military commandant to exercise a veto upon the decisions of the [VRA] Council, but without success.’429 Templeton felt strongly that Hutton’s plans, if promulgated, would mean the subjugation of the associations to the military. Templeton even questioned the right of the GOC to make up regulations for the associations at all: ‘I can see no reason why [Hutton] should have been charged with the duty of framing regulations for the rifle associations which are not, and never have been, under military control.’430 Every single State rifle association took up the cry publicly in the press, and privately, with their Parliamentary supporters.
On 29 January, in the face of this resistance, Hutton ordered a special meeting of the CCRAA executive committee in Melbourne.431 The meeting was conducted in camera, and was notable for its singular outcome—a statement to the press by Hutton reiterating his stated plans and saying ‘that many useful suggestions been made by the delegates’.432 The opposition of the associations was to no avail. On 19 February it was announced that the new regulations would come into force on 1 March (they actually took force in July). They were unchanged in any significant way.433 Despite the
428 Argus, 29 January 1904, p. 6. 429 Argus, 18 January 1904, p. 7. 430 ibid. 431 Argus, 29 January 1904, p. 6. 432 ibid. 433 Sydney Morning Herald, 20 February 1904, p. 14. 13
apparent attempt at consultation, Hutton style, in January, it seemed that the GOC was as usual determined to get his way.
By April 1904, the State associations had begun to toe Hutton’s line with more service shooting matches and more ‘running man’ targets at the ranges. There was even, in some cases, attendance at drill, although without much enthusiasm. In Victoria for example, as early as July 1902, a paltry 100 Victorian riflemen were turning up to drill; numbers did not increase.434 In NSW, even the DRA, formed in 1898 as a counter-point to the NRA of NSW by Major-General French, folded into the State association because of the amount of service shooting now underway in that association. New service rifles, the Short Magazine Lee-Enfield (SMLE or ‘smellie’ as they were most popularly known) were also arriving in Australia, and some became available to rifle clubs. However, rail passes were restricted to riflemen within a 50 mile radius of a match (much to the chagrin of those in Queensland in particular), while restricted ammunition issues remained a sore point to many clubs throughout Australia.435
Throughout 1904 Hutton continued to put the pressure on rifle clubs and associations, especially in Victoria. On 16 June he met with delegates from the newly formed Rifle Clubs Unions in Victoria Barracks in Melbourne to reinforce his authority.436 The acting State Commandant, Colonel Robert Robertson, and the new Secretary for Rifle Clubs, Major M. M. Boam (Hutton’s replacement for Templeton) were in attendance. Hutton, in no uncertain terms, reminded them that they were part of the military organisation and that he expected them to affiliate with military units. The CCRAA was now simply an advisory body to him, the Commander-in-Chief. Hutton also suggested that if the rifle club unions were not represented democratically on the VRA, the State
434 Argus, 9 July 1902, p. 6. 435 The cost and restrictions on ammunition would boil over in NSW in early 1905, with open protests launched against the Defence Department and its Minister by the NRA of NSW. 436 Rifle Club Unions were essentially a structure imposed on rifle clubs by the Defence Department. They brought clubs in specific districts together under a local administration and proved to be popular. But Defence also formed them to undermine the authority of the State associations. The Central Office of the Defence Department was located in Melbourne until 1962. 14
Commandant, Brigadier Jose Maria Gordon, would create a new association which would make sure that this occurred.437 It was another thinly disguised threat against Templeton and the former Volunteer officers on the VRA Council, which to date had refused District Rifle Union representatives a place on their Council. No doubt there was a message there as well for the CCRAA.
While these changes were occurring Hutton’s relationship with the Government and especially with the new Defence Minister, Senator Andrew Dawson, had disintegrated. In McMullin’s words:
Hutton was experienced, autocratic and outspoken, with a privileged background, a pronounced imperial outlook and a dearth of tact. Dawson, in stark contrast, ‘a hard-drinking, poorly educated orphan’, had been a miner, bullock-driver and republican journalist who not only controversially opposed the dispatch of Queensland’s first contingent to the Boer War; he was contemptuous of what he saw as excessive military pomposity, and was intent on overhauling Australia’s defence administration. A smooth relationship between the Defence minister and his GOC was never likely.438
As a result of public criticism of him by Hutton and the war of words in personal and official correspondence, Dawson moved to abolish the position of GOC and replace the role by a Council of Defence and Military and Naval Boards with an Inspector-General to scrutinize efficiency.439 The processes for this reform were being put in place with the new Defence Act of 1904. Hutton’s tenure was over; he was to depart for London by the end of 1904. Hutton did not let these developments slow him down; he pushed ahead with more reform right until the end of his time as GOC.
When the Defence Act finally went before Parliament in July 1904, it presaged an entirely changed situation for the rifle club movement. The Act brought with it a detailed set of Rifle Club Regulations, formally tying the rifle club movement into the new defence structure of Australia and Hutton’s vision of the Australian Military Forces. Hutton had, as usual, completely ignored both the
437 Sydney Morning Herald, 16 June 1904, p. 6. 438 R. McMullin, So Monstrous a Travesty, Scribe Publications, Melbourne, 2004, pp. 103 - 4. 439 D.J. Murphy, 'Dawson, Andrew (1863–1910)', Australian Dictionary of Biography, National Centre of Biography, Australian National University,
resistance to his goals as well as any suggestions made to modify them. As a result, Hutton reported to Parliament, ‘It is hoped that at an early date it may be possible to make arrangements for enrolling qualified members of the rifle clubs as an organised Reserve, so as to complete the ranks of the peace establishments required, upon a national emergency.’440
What had become practice in 1903 became law in 1904: rifle clubs were affiliated to Militia units and brought directly under military command and control. Appointments of rifle club captains were gazetted just like any other military appointment and to win efficiency payments and ammunition allowances, riflemen had to pass the standards laid down in annual military musketry practices.441 It became common practice for rifle clubs and their affiliated Militia units to fire together at the range and District Orders throughout the Commonwealth were filled with range practice notices such as: ‘G Company 10th Australian Infantry Regiment and Goolwa Rifle Club on 28 December’.442
Despite Hutton’s falling out with Defence Minister Dawson, and although his dream of the rifle clubs forming a reserve would never be realised, by September 1904 it appeared that there was an increasing acceptance—or at least less overt resistance—of the changes that Hutton was introducing. In a sign that not everyone had stopped complaining however, and following the CCRAA meeting in October, Hutton was forced to issue a General Order to State Commandants to ensure that anyone in rifle clubs, as they were now part of the military system, ‘were under no account to communicate with the Minister [for Defence] except through him, the GOC.’443 As far as Hutton was concerned, the rifle clubs (and associations) were now part of the military system of defence, so they ought to act like they were. This attempt to muzzle the rifle clubs in this regard was largely
440 ‘Military Forces of the Commonwealth of Australia - Second Annual Report by Major-General Sir Edward Hutton, K.C.M.G., C.B., Commanding’, Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia, 5 July 1904, Robert S. Brain, Govt. Printer Victoria, Melbourne, 1904, p. 15. 441 Military Forces of the Commonwealth - Musketry Regulations 1903, Robert S. Brain, Govt. Printer Victoria, Melbourne, 1904, p. 14. 442 ‘District Order No.118, 23 November 1903’, Military Forces of the Commonwealth - South Australia District Orders 1902- 1920, R.E.E. Rogers, Govt. Printer, Adelaide, 1903, npn. 443 Sydney Morning Herald, 21 November 1904, p.14. 16
successful, although the Victorian Rifle Association continued to reject Hutton’s premise that regulations for rifle associations were entirely a military matter.444
In November 1904, a general meeting of the CCRAA was called for at Victoria Barracks, Melbourne. It was to be Hutton’s last appearance as president. Brigadier J.M. Gordon, the
Victorian Commandant, was vice-president for the meeting. Hutton’s tenure as Australia’s first Commander-in-Chief was coming to an end, just as yet another new Defence Minister, James Whiteside McCay, a former Militia officer, was sworn in. Hutton thanked the CCRAA for its support while he had been the G.O.C. He described his command as ‘an especially difficult and embarrassing one’, but also said that ‘few of his duties had given him greater pleasure than in making the efforts to place the whole system of rifle shooting upon a general uniform basis.’ 445 The council in some ways may have been relieved to see the combative Hutton depart, but equally had to acknowledge his strong will and determination to ‘professionalise’ the rifle club movement as part of Australia’s defence.
On Hutton’s departure for England on 16 November 1904, he gave a warm and complimentary farewell speech on the dock at Port Melbourne. Hutton maintained his ardour for the reforms of the rifle club movement to the last, saying in his speech:
I beg especially to convey my hearty congratulations to the riflemen of Australia for the success which the rifle club system has already achieved. I trust that the scope of its usefulness may still further be extended, and that the patriotic movement, so valuable as an auxiliary to the defence system of Australia, may be still further developed and increased. 446
Certainly Hutton’s role as president of the CCRAA had brought many changes. He was determined, assertive, even aggressive in pushing change through—but his was a larger world view than most in the rifle club movement were able to accept. The very leaders of the movement whom
444 ‘Minutes of the Victorian Rifle Association, 22 January 1904’, pp. 162-167, VRA Archive, Bendigo. 445 Argus, 7 November 1904, p. 6. 446 Advertiser, 16 November 1904, p.7. 17
he may have seen as impediments to his reforms, such as Templeton, Davies and Dean, were the very men who had overcome many of the petty issues between colonies to bring the rifle club movement to its present level. These men understood that rifle club men in Australia were not, by and large, interested in becoming soldiers.
In late December 1904, with Hutton gone, the CCRAA met for the first time at the Karrakatta Rifle Range in Perth to discuss the selection of a team for Bisley in 1905 and once again, how to fund it. The president for the meeting was Western Australian commandant Lieutenant Colonel Percy Ralph Ricardo.447 With the return to its more normal routine and preoccupations, a somewhat tumultuous 1904 came to a close for the CCRAA. What remained to be seen was whether Hutton’s replacement—the Military Board and the Inspector-General, supported by the senior State commandants and commanders—would continue the ‘reforms’ which Hutton had forced upon the rifle club movement. Most of all, would the military influence on the way the rifle associations and rifle clubs conducted their business be reinforced, or, with Hutton’s departure, would the status quo ante be restored?
447 Earlier in 1902 Ricardo had noted in a letter to the editor that Hutton ‘is anxious that rifle clubs should be something more than a few men spending a Saturday afternoon shooting off a sweepstake at a fixed target at a known distance.’ West Australian, 5 February 1904, p. 3. For Ricardo’s career, see B. Crouchley, ‘Ricardo, Percy Ralph (1855-1907)’, Australian Dictionary of Biography, National Centre of Biography, Australian National University,
Chapter 6
The seeds of discord 1905-1910
In this chapter, the thesis will argue that the Rifle Club Regulations introduced in 1904, while in theory fully integrating the rifle club movement as Reservists in the new Commonwealth Defence structure, were in fact a failure. They were a failure mainly because the essential character of the rifle club movement was left fundamentally unchanged. Although the new Regulations formally placed the rifle clubs under military control, and to some extent, under military discipline, the reality remained that riflemen, by and large, preferred to shoot for money prizes as individuals. In principle they remained generally uninterested in becoming more like soldiers and unimpressed by military control of any sort, but if some drill and a qualifying shoot every year was the price they had to pay for continued access to free ammunition and range time, then so be it.
Although the promulgation of new Commonwealth Rifle Regulations and Defence Act in 1904 appeared to settle the organisational disturbances created by the dynamic and single-minded General Hutton in both the rifle club movement and the new Commonwealth Military Forces, this was, in fact, not so. Hutton had forced the old colonial defence forces into a new paradigm—as the Commonwealth Military Forces. Not all sections of the defence forces had embraced the change. The rifle club movement had resisted Hutton more successfully than most; the old guard remained in charge. Meanwhile, while the internal Australian Federal Defence infrastructure and policies continued to evolve, the background international situation grew more uncertain as time went by. This, in turn, placed new pressures on Australia’s defence preparedness within the Imperial context and by 1911, resulted in compulsory military training being introduced in Australia.
The growing military power and imperial agenda of Germany in the early 20th Century had began to alarm military and naval planners in England. In Asia, however, Japan’s rising national strength in 1
north Asia had been embraced by an Anglo-Japanese Alliance signed in 1902 (the alliance would continue until 1923). With the signing of the alliance, by extension, Australia was required to treat the Japanese as allies as well, although Japan was viewed with increasing suspicion by some prominent Australians. After Federation, Imperial Japanese Navy training ships continued the tradition, established since 1878, of visiting Australian ports. In 1903, for example, a training squadron consisting of three identical cruisers, Matsushima, Itsukushima and Hashidate, with more than 1,000 men aboard, visited ports between Perth and Townsville. In Perth and Sydney rifle matches were organised for the first time between these Japanese sailors and local rifle teams.448
Notwithstanding the polite relations with Japanese visitors, however, many professional soldiers of the nascent Commonwealth Military Forces were concerned about Japanese ambitions, especially after their victory in the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-05. At this time, Australia’s defence forces were at their lowest ebb since Federation with the total number of troops down from 28,823 (including 1,568 regulars) in March 1901 to 20,476 (including 1,276 regulars) in July 1905.449 Alfred Deakin, once more the Australian Prime Minister, judged that it was time for some form of obligatory military training to be introduced. Rifle clubs remained a ‘poor cousin’ to defence thinking overall. Although the Imperial Defence Committee did suggest rifle club members drill and enlist as reservists, but Deakin’s Government did not follow through on the recommendation.450
In part, the role of rifle clubs in Australia’s defence was ill-defined because in the background to the wider defence considerations was the ongoing debate about the usefulness of military versus target rifle shooting. In an article in his rifle club’s report for 1905, one club member noted:
Let us briefly compare the cost and value of a rifle clubman with that of a partially paid military man. In the military, a partially paid man costs the country twice as much as a volunteer, and a volunteer costs twice as much as [a] rifle clubman. In the case of the partially paid men, you
448 The only previous rifle match with Japanese sailors had been one organised in Hobart during the visit of the Tsukuba in 1882. 449 D.C.S. Sissons, ‘Attitudes to Japan and Defence’, MA Thesis, University of Melbourne, 1956, p. 21. 450 C. Wilcox, ‘Australia’s Citizen Army 1889-1914’, Ch.6, p. 9. 2
have a body of soldiers efficient in drill, but deficient in shooting (A SCIENCE THAT TAKES YEARS TO LEARN). In the case of the rifle clubman, you have a body of men at a QUARTER THE COST who can within a FEW WEEKS become efficient enough in drill to take the field, and who are as a body the best rifle shots in the world. In time of war, which defenders would you prefer to sleep behind, the shooters or the paraders? Then why should the one receive so much more support from the Government than the other? I cannot give a percentage of first-class marksmen in the ranks of the military, but I am confident that the rifle clubman would more than double it. 451
Despite this type of endorsement, in July 1905 a report on the state of rifle clubs in Australia showed that numbers of rifle club members were dropping—from 32,883 in July 1901 to 30,242. Victoria saw the largest drop, from 21,565 in July 1901 to only 16,283, with Queensland and especially Tasmania seeing falls as well.452 In Victoria’s case, the compulsory retirement of the former commander of rifle clubs, Colonel Templeton, and imposition of military regulations on the hitherto independent clubs may have accounted for the decline there. In Tasmania, the disastrous effects of Hutton’s military reforms on the wholly Volunteer Tasmanian defence structure were seen to be directly responsible. General reasons, however, were more likely practical. Perceptions that there was less ammunition available for practice, increased bureaucracy around obtaining railway passes and fewer of them available, the end of the Boer War and the introduction of the Rifle Club Regulations, all contributed to the decline.
Paradoxically, in May 1905, Alexander Ferguson—of the Queensland Rifle Association (QRA) council and a Commonwealth Council of Rifle Associations of Australia (CCRAA) delegate—had been appointed as a consultative member of the Military Board, representing Australian rifle clubs.453 The rifle club movement had a ‘seat at the table’ and was poised to be perhaps at its highest level of
451 E.G. Diddams, ‘Rifle Shooting from the Rifle Clubman’s Point of View’, North Sydney Rifle Club: Report from 23 March 1904 to 19 June 1905, pub.unk., Sydney, 1905, npn. 452 ‘Military Forces - Return showing numbers in the several States, 21 November 1905’, Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia, Session 1905, Vol.II, Report No.57, Robert S. Brain, Govt. Printer Victoria, Melbourne, 1906, p. 325. The CCRAA was quiet in 1905; newspaper reports even of the annual meeting in October 1905 in Melbourne, most unusually, are virtually non-existent. Reports of delegates being elected to attend the Council meeting were absent from all State Association proceedings except NSW. The usually reliable report from the NSW delegates in the NRA of NSW Annual Report for 1905 is also missing. It seems that the CCRAA had little to discuss. 453 ‘Military Order 32 of 11 May 1905’, Index to Military Orders 1905, Robert S. Brain, Govt. Printer Victoria, Melbourne, 1906. 3
influence since it was declared a ‘movement’ by Templeton at a public meeting in Melbourne’s Town Hall in July 1900. Attending that 1900 meeting was none other than Alfred Deakin. Deakin, a former Defence Minister and three times Prime Minister, was a leading advocate of strong Australian defence forces.454 Coupled with rising concern at growing Japanese power and ambition, and Deakin’s encouragement of the view that that Australia needed to be better prepared for its own defence, the rifle club movement was by 1905 uniquely positioned to capitalise on the sentiment.
The rifle club movement had even reached far away Darwin. By the end of 1901, Darwin had two rifle clubs, the original and now civilian Darwin Rifle Club and a newly formed Port Darwin Defence Rifle Club (PDDRC). The new club was approved by Adelaide’s Military Staff Office (the Northern Territory was in South Australia’s jurisdiction) and it sent from Adelaide by sea ‘41 Martini-Henry rifles and slings and 2,460 rounds of ball cartridges’. In April 1902 the club received ‘15 rifles of the latest type’ (Martini-Enfields) with 20 more to come. In January 1903 the PDDRC had 41 members of which about 20 were active; the Darwin Rifle Club in April 1904 had 27 full and four honorary members.455
In 1905 developments in the wider scene would have positive effects on the Australian rifle club movement. In 1902 the British Field Marshal Lord Roberts, hero of the Afghanistan campaign and the war in South Africa, had came out strongly in a speech at Bisley in England in support of rifle shooting. Robert’s view that accurate rifle shooting was the queen of the battlefield gained much traction in Australia; his major speech on the issue was even promulgated to all Australian units by General Order.456 Supporters of rifle shooting at the time seized on Robert’s sentiments as evidence that the rifle club movement in Australia should therefore be more fervently supported by the Government. By 1905, however, with his campaign in England for public support of rifle clubs
454 For details of Deakin’s attitudes to defence, see R. Norris, 'Deakin, Alfred (1856–1919)', Australian Dictionary of Biography, National Centre of Biography, Australian National University, http://adb.anu.edu.au/biography/deakin- alfred-5927/text10099, accessed 17 June 2013. 455 Northern Territory Times and Gazette, 29 March 1901, p. 2; 11 April 1902, p. 5; and 1 April 1904, p. 3. 456 ‘General Order 162 of 13 September 1902’, Military Forces of the Commonwealth - Index to General Orders 1902, Robert S. Brain, Govt. Printer Victoria, Melbourne, 1903, npn. 4
having failed, Roberts began to support a broader objective—mass military training—and openly supported a new, popular organisation formed to promote the idea called the National Service League. This campaign also gained widespread newspaper coverage in Australia, leading to a closely related organisation, the National Defence League (NDL), being formed in Sydney in September 1905. 457
The NDL preached universal compulsory military training for boys and adult men in Australia and the establishment of an adequate and effective system of national defence. Among the leaders of the movement was William Morris Hughes, ‘who…was one of the founders…[and] among its influential supporters and office-bearers were Sir Normand MacLaurin, Sir Julian Solomons, J.C. Watson, Bruce Smith, Professors Mungo MacCallum and J.T. Wilson of the University of Sydney, the Bishop of North Queensland, and A.W. Jose, Australian representative of The Times.’458 In NSW, particularly in the countryside, many riflemen became involved in the NDL. The state secretary of the NDL was Lieutenant Herbert Dakin, who had become secretary of the NRA of NSW in 1904.459 In August 1906, writing in the NDL’s journal, The Call, Dakin had urged a greater recognition of rifle clubs in the defence system, and for them to play a greater role in defence on a Swiss model where rifle clubs conducted the militia musketry courses.460
The most prominent member of the NDL in NSW was Lieutenant Colonel Gerald Ross Campbell, its first secretary and editor of The Call. Campbell was the commanding officer of the 1st Regiment, NSW Scottish Rifles (which he helped raise in 1885) and was also a vice-president of the NRA of NSW. 461 In December 1905 he addressed the Council of the NRA of NSW about the objectives of the NDL and asked for its sympathy; the council responded positively. The smaller
457 Sydney Morning Herald, 6 September 1905, p. 1. 458 L.L. Robson, The First A.I.F.: a Study of its Recruitment 1914-1918, pp. 11-12. 459 Dakin was to become the longest serving secretary of the NRA of NSW, serving until his death in 1946. Sydney Morning Herald, 24 September 1946, p. 4. 460 H. Dakin, ‘The Rifle Clubs and National Defence’, The Call, No.1, 8 August 1906, p. 13. 461 J. Barrett, ‘Campbell, Gerald Ross (1858-1942)’, Australian Dictionary of Biography, Vol.7, Melbourne University Press, 1979, pp. 548-9. 5
Victorian Division of the NDL was led by newspaper man and former Victorian Mounted Rifles officer Lieutenant-Colonel William Thomas Reay.462 The well-known Victorian rifle shot, delegate to the CCRAA and from May 1906, secretary of the Victorian Rifle Association (VRA), Philip Fargher, was one of his lieutenants.463 The NDL grew in influence in the general political atmosphere of 1905, promoting militarisation in Australian society.
Despite the improvement in the status of the rifle club movement elsewhere in Australia as the NDL gathered strength over the period 1905-1910, in Western Australia the rifle club movement continued to suffer from internal divisions. The NRA of WA along the coastal centres and the WA Goldfields Rifle Association based on Kalgoorlie held only two ‘King’s’ prize matches between 1903 to 1909. Their attempts to work together broke down by 1905 and the two associations separated once again, even though by 1905 there were 48 rifle clubs in the State and over 2,069 riflemen. 464 Finally, in March 1906 and only with the intercession of the state Commandant, Lieutenant Colonel Robert Wallace, were the two associations able to put aside their differences and amalgamate once again.465 It was still not a happy marriage. The NRA of WA saw itself as the more senior body; the Goldfields thought the same about itself. 466
462 D. Langmore, ‘Reay, William Thomas (1858-1929)’, Australian Dictionary of Biography, Vol.11, Melbourne University Press, 1988, pp. 344-5. 463 Sydney Morning Herald, 8 November 1906, p. 7. 464 Western Australian, 3 April 1905, p. 3. 465 Wallace was a permanent officer of the Royal Australian Artillery, and commanded the 3rd Australian Commonwealth Horse Battalion in the Boer War. Wallace had been long involved in rifle shooting in Victoria and was a strong supporter of rifle shooting. See the Argus, 9 October 1915, p. 16. 466 Debilitating personality conflicts and other issues destroyed the work to bring the two groups together. There were disagreements over the need for affiliation fees to be paid to each other association. Small issues, such as not inviting any Goldfields riflemen to join the team rushed to Fremantle to shoot against the American fleet in 1908, became seen to be deliberate slights, even though there was no time to do otherwise (and the match was cancelled anyway). In late 1908 the military in WA decided to impose a district rifle union organisation on rifle clubs throughout the State. This forced the NRA of WA to re-write its constitution, but only after fiercely contested views over grants and powers from the Coastal and Goldfields divisions of the NRA of WA were adjudicated by the military commandant. It was not until mid-1910 that the new constitution was adopted and peace broke out, again with the help of the new State Commandant, Lieutenant Colonel G. G. H. Irving. The NRA of WA was at last one unified body. D. Birkbeck, ‘The Goldfields Rifle Association’, Rifle News, Vol.32, No.2, June 1992, pp. 5-7. 6
Moreover, despite a more positive outlook for rifle shooting arising from the political interest in building stronger Australian defences, 1906 was little better as a year for the CCRAA, for once again the Commonwealth Government refused to provide a grant to send a team to Bisley. No Australian teams therefore competed for the Kolapore or McKinnon Cups for the third year in a row, much to the frustration of Australian riflemen everywhere. In fact in the Estimates that year the Commonwealth Government only provided for £100 for the CCRAA and £1,000 for rifle clubs everywhere—hardly generous, although the rifle clubs grants were later increased to a little over £5,000.467
The defence establishment, meanwhile, continued to increase its control of rifle clubs further. Threatened with effective disenfranchisement by the development, with the encouragement of the military, of new groupings of district rifle clubs into unions not controlled by the associations, changes to the constitutions of the state associations were accepted whereby district [state] Commandants were appointed as ex officio presidents of the councils and commanding officers of Militia corps/regiments as ex officio members. In return the associations were recognised as the ‘State Rifle Associations’ and given control of the rifle clubs unions.468 A Staff Officer for Rifle Clubs was also appointed to represent the Commandant in each military district.469 Military influence was also growing in other ways. In Queensland:
In deference to public opinion, and the expressed wish of the military authorities service matches were then made a special feature in the annual prize meeting programme, and these matches soon gained in popularity, more especially in the Militia units, and the Volunteers. At the 1906 prize meeting there were no less than seven military or service matches provided for in the programme. These included field firing, rapid firing, and magazine fire competitions, recruits rapid firing, teams snap shooting and fixed head and shoulder target shooting, and good entries were received for each of these events. 470
467 Brisbane Courier, 3 August 1906, p. 5 and Sydney Morning Herald, 8 August 1906, p. 10. 468 C.H. Cromack, The History of the National Rifle Association of New South Wales,1860-1956, p. 41. 469 ibid. 470 A.T. Jackson, Southern Queensland Rifle Association Jubilee, 1877-1927: a brief History of the Association during the past Fifty Years, p. 38. 7
Yet one prominent figure in the rifle shooting movement continued to encourage the development of the sport for its own sake. Colonel Templeton, still chairman of the VRA, left for England early in 1906 and then attended Bisley in July. He attended the annual meeting of the NRA, read out a formal invitation for a British team to visit Australia in 1907, and lobbied endlessly to achieve that end. The NRA chairman, Major-General Lord Cheylsmore, understanding the value of a British team brand and in acknowledgement of Templeton’s powers of persuasion and high standing with the NRA, suggested that if an Australian team got to Bisley in 1907 then the NRA might well be able to reciprocate.471 This news and ceaseless haranguing of the Australian Government by the CCRAA finally drew a positive response—the promise of a £1 for £1 subsidy up to £1,000 to send a team to Bisley in 1907.472
During 1906 the wider defence debate in Australia also continued to have a direct impact on the rifle club movement. As calls for compulsory military service of school boys and men grew in England, so did they grow in Australia. In August the Committee of Imperial Defence in London made a number of suggestions for the organisation of defence in Australia—one of these was to affiliate rifle clubs to militia units. This idea was later rejected by Australia’s Military Board, but as a result of the advocacy by the rifle clubs representative on the Military Board, Alexander Ferguson, it was announced in November that captains of rifle clubs could apply for militia commissions as 2nd Lieutenants on a ratio of 1:100 to rifle club members in the State of origin. 473 On 28 September 1906 Deakin made a major speech following up on the Imperial Committee’s recommendations.
471 In an interesting example of ‘rifle politics’ at Bisley that year, Templeton discovered that eight individual Australian riflemen who were at Bisley in 1906 had entered their names as an Australian team to compete for the Kolapore Cup. He smartly stepped in and dissuaded them from proceeding, presumably on the basis that this would have undermined the CCRAA’s lobbying for support from the Commonwealth Government. Brisbane Courier, 26 February 1907, p. 4. 472 Sydney Morning Herald, 21 March 1907, p. 7. 473 ‘General Order 299 of 11 December 1906’, Military Forces of the Commonwealth - General Orders for 1906, Robt. S. Brain, Govt. Printer Victoria, 1907, npn. Not everyone were impressed: ‘In the event of active service, the rifle clubs would act largely as sharp-shooters, and would probably be left much to their own devices as regards rifle equipment. Bearing in mind the weird contrivances that occasionally make their appearance on the range, an inspection of a commando in battle array, would be largely reminiscent of the Marquis of Worcester’s “Century of Inventions.” ’ A.G. Leslie, Rifle Sketches, George Robinson & Co. Pty. Ltd., Melbourne, 1906, p. 105. 8
While it focused on naval defence, the speech was a catalyst for further debate on rifle clubs within the context of defence measures in general.474
Meanwhile, the Anglo-Japanese alliance had been renewed in 1905 following Japan’s military victory over the Russians that year, and Imperial Japanese Navy training warships visited Australia again in 1906.475 Arriving first at Thursday Island in April, the Japanese training squadron consisted of the same three cruisers which had visited in 1903. The squadron made its way to Cooktown, Townsville, then directly to Melbourne before returning to Sydney. In Melbourne a team of ten Japanese sailors fired against the Kew Rifle Club on 12 May; then a team of 12 shot against a combined Metropolitan Association team and a Port Melbourne Rifle Club team at the Port Melbourne range at 500 and 600 yards. The Japanese lost both times: ‘It is stated that the Japanese are unaccustomed to the target practice with the service rifle.’476 In Sydney, another match was held against Japanese sailors at Randwick on 26 May. It was a ‘running man’ match, with 13 men a side at 300 yards firing as many shots as possible as the target ‘ran’ for 50 yards, with bull’s-eyes counting for five and other hits for four. As in Melbourne the Japanese were outclassed, scoring only 170 against the NRA of NSW’s team score of 285.477
By late December 1906, when the Commonwealth matches were conducted at Launceston in Tasmania and the CCRAA met for its annual meeting there, it seemed that situation for the rifle club movement had changed for the better. The meeting was chaired by Major General John
474 West Australian, 29 September 1906, p. 14. 475 The Victorian Colonel John Charles Hoad, who had been attached to the Japanese forces during the war against the Russians, gave presentations on the war and the Japanese forces to officers and the public around Australia, building awareness of their growing power. 476 Sydney Morning Herald, 14 May 1906, p. 8. 477 Report of the National Rifle Association of New South Wales for 1906, F. Clark, Sydney, 1907, p. 112 and the Sydney Morning Herald, 26 May 1906, p. 12. A comparison of Japanese team names from Melbourne and Sydney show only two men who had fired in both locations, indicating that for the Japanese at least, no team of ‘cracks’ had been prepared. One of the Japanese team of 1906, Petty Officer Okuda, had also been in the 1903 visit as an Able-Bodied Seaman and had been top scorer in the match held in Sydney that year. 9
Charles Hoad, the new Inspector-General.478 There were no delegates or rifle team from WA that year, a fall-out from the ongoing issues between the two rifle associations there. Bisley dominated the discussions. Before the meeting began, an announcement had been made by the NRA that it intended to send a team to Australia in October 1907. Suddenly new life was breathed into the CCRAA, which not only had to send a team to Bisley in 1907, but also host a British team in Australia. It was as a consequence an extremely busy and complex year for the rifle shooting movement and the CCRAA. With the Government supporting the costs of the team for Bisley to the tune of £1,000, it proved relatively easy to raise the other £1,000 through public subscription, with most funds coming from riflemen in the various States. The selection of the team was made over the protest of some who pointed out the inherent weakness of a team based on population rather than other measures—for example, Western Australia had more rifle clubs than South Australia but was only allowed one rifleman on the team against two from South Australia. Nonetheless, the Australian team was sent overseas in good time.479
The Australian team at Bisley, lead by Theodore Stanley Marshall, the new CCRAA Secretary, was very successful. It tied with Britain in the Kolapore Cup competition on 12 July 1907 with a record score of 778. Individually, the men also won a wide range of prizes (totaling £1,400), and trophies. Lieutenant Walter Colman Addison from South Australia’s Orroroo Club, and a member of the local squadron of the 17th Light Horse Regiment, famously became the first Australian ever to win the coveted NRA King’s Prize, news of which galvanised Australian riflemen and the public, especially in his home State.480
478 W. Perry, 'Hoad, Sir John Charles (1856–1911)', Australian Dictionary of Biography, National Centre of Biography, Australian National University,
These successes meant that when the CCRAA executive committee met again on 17 July to call on the Defence Minister, Senator Thomas Ewing, and ask for Commonwealth assistance in the matter of hosting the British rifle team due out in October, the Government responded promptly with a grant of £1,000. After the Bisley matches, both Australian and British teams went to Canada to compete for the Palma Trophy. Fired at the military range next to the Ottawa River at Rockcliffe, near Ottawa on 7 September 1907, this time the Australians found themselves outclassed by the Americans and Canadians, although coming in before the British and with Addison top-scoring for the team.481 Back in Australia, there was much excitement surrounding the visit by the British team, which had arrived from Canada in October 1907. Here was vindication that the British felt highly enough of the Australian rifle shooting movement that it would actually send a team out to compete. A special match was designed to honour the occasion—the Empire Match, to be fired over 28 and 29 October against British and New Zealand teams during the NRA of NSW programme in Sydney.482
The CCRAA met in Brisbane on 10 October, 1907. Major-General J.C. Hoad, now Australia’s most senior military officer, again presided over the meeting; Colonel J.S. Lyster, the Queensland state Commandant, was vice-president. Also present at the council meeting was Commander Samuel Augustus Pethebridge, the acting Secretary of Defence and a former Commander of the Queensland Naval Brigade.483 The Council meeting agreed to Military Board suggestions for the establishment of Light Horse trophy matches. After an unsteady start to this new and costly competition, it was agreed that the principal Prince of Wales Trophy would be shot for on a state by state basis, in each state in turn, in conjunction with the Commonwealth Match for that state, starting with South Australia in 1908. Another Light Horse competition, the Hutton Trophy Match, would also be conducted in the same manner, except that it would begin with Queensland in
481 C.C.C. Cheshire, The History and Records of the Palma Match (The World Long Range Rifle Team Championships), Oxonian Rewly Press Ltd., UK, 1992, pp. 4.96-4.97. 482 Nineteenth Annual Report of the Commonwealth Council of Rifle Associations of Australia, F. Clarke, Sydney, 1907, pp. 35-37. 483 Pethebridge was Acting Defence Secretary from 1906-1910, and author of a memorandum in 1907 which did not recognise rifle clubs. Pethebridge, S.A., Memorandum on the Proposed Organization of a National Guard for the Land Defence of Australia, J. Kemp, Govt. Printer, Melbourne,1908. 11
1908. Both of these matches were to be handed to state Commandants to manage as the CCRAA did not want to be seen to be simply managing service shooting for the Militia.484
Among other matters, the CCRAA council agreed to change its constitution and regulations, dispensing with the ex-officio military president and vice-president, and allowing for a chairman to be elected from within the state association representatives on Council.485 It was an interesting move at the very time when military control and interest in rifle shooting was increasing. At the very least, it was a move designed to retain the independence of the CCRAA and it was no coincidence that Templeton, who fiercely defended the independence of the associations from military control, was voted in again as chairman for 1908.
In late October 1907 attention shifted to the inaugural Empire Match. Held at Randwick rifle range, the match, ‘for supremacy in the British rifle shooting world’ and ‘the shooting match of the year’, had been designed by Colonel Templeton.486 The prize was a Challenge Shield (not yet designed or purchased) and the match was held for teams of eight marksmen over two days with 10 shots at each 200, 500 and 600 yards on day one, and the same at 800, 900 and 1,000 yards on day two. The Empire Match was won by Australia, with New Zealand second and Great Britain third. The Australian team was a notable one, containing a number of the best shots ever produced.487 The Advertiser observed that ‘the finish was no more exciting than a steeplechase with all the horses down but one’.488 Later, there was criticism by one state Commandant that ‘on the occasion of the most important rifle match ever held in Australia, there was only a sparse attendance by the public. The people would, however, have crowded to a cricket match if an English eleven had been present.’489
484 Nineteenth Annual Report of the Commonwealth Council of Rifle Associations of Australia, F. Clarke, Sydney, 1907, pp. 12-16. 485 Nineteenth Annual Report of the Commonwealth Council of Rifle Associations of Australia, F. Clarke, Sydney, 1907, pp. 8-10. 486 Report of the National Rifle Association for New South Wales for 1907, F. Clarke, Sydney 1907, p. 33. 487 Anon., ‘History of the Empire Match’, Australian Rifleman, Vol.6, No.2, May-June 1984, p. 20. 488 The Advertiser, 30 October 1907, p. 7. 489 The British team refused to fire matches against individual States as a team, and instead sent detachments to Bathurst (the Cutler’s home town) in NSW and Hamilton and Bendigo in Victoria. Even when the team visited Tasmania, Victoria and South Australia in turn, it was to take part in individual matches. The team was officially welcomed by 12
Even the champions of Bisley, it appeared, could not draw much of a crowd. Rifle shooting was never a great spectator sport, despite its popularity with the sportsmen themselves.
It was a highly successful year and those in the rifle club movement were pleased. Deakin wrote to the Governor-General, Lord Hopetoun: ‘In no previous year has such general interest been taken in rifle shooting in the several States and the result of the visit of a team of such renowned shots cannot fail to be of great value generally to our Military Forces including the Rifle Clubs of Australia…the National Defence of the Empire will thereby be largely benefitted.’490 The British team left Australia, but not without publicly comparing the Australians to the Americans who had won the Palma Match in Canada: ‘phenomenal shooting, phenomenal men, phenomenal rifles, and phenomenal organisation. America had reduced rifle shooting to a fine art’.491 As the Australians were soon to discover, if the British were tough opponents on the rifle range, the Americans were tougher still.
While the CCRAA was engrossed in its own affairs, despite the international flavour of its endeavours, the defence debate in Australia continued. The year 1907 had seen the Army Council in Britain write to the NRA, ‘expressing new views as to the manner in which rifle shooting should be practised in regard to training for war’.492 For many military men, shooting at fixed targets— deliberate shooting—was elementary; it was snap and rapid shooting, often at indeterminate ranges and against diverse types of targets, which was important. A lively public debate quickly sprung up about this subject, amplifying earlier public interchanges on the subject since the 1890s, and even before that. The Director of Military Science at the University of Sydney, Lieutenant Colonel Hubert John Foster, wrote a series of articles in the journal of the NDL, The Call, in which he stated that the effect of rifle clubs ‘in forming soldiers for war will be seen to be but slight, if the conditions
the Minister for Defence in Melbourne, and everywhere they went, they were entertained and feted. The British team departed for England on 28 November 1907. Report of the National Rifle Association for New South Wales for 1907, F. Clarke, Sydney 1907, p. 33. 490 ‘Letter Deakin to Northcote, 26 November 1907’, NAA A6662, Item 940512. 491 West Australian, 12 November 1907, p. 7. 492 A.P. Humphry, T.F. Fremantle, et al, History of the National Rifle Association during its first fifty years, 1859 to 1909, pp. 462. 13
attending shooting in battle are analysed, and there will be reason to believe that their military utility has been greatly overrated’, that ‘good individual shooting is useless in battle’, and that ‘the citizen need not waste time in trying to become a good shot, in order to become an effective defender of his country.’493
These statements evoked a quick response from rifle shooting and rifle club supporters. Military men wanted the rifle clubs to toe the military line and drill in camps with the militia as well as adhere to military thinking on how rifle shooting should be conducted. However, rifle associations continued to resist calls by the military men to replace ‘pastime’ shooting (at fixed targets at known ranges) with ‘service shooting’ (snap and rapid shooting at moving or shorter range targets). However, one thing the rifle associations and the military absolutely agreed to was the need to introduce compulsory military service.
Despite these disagreements over the methods and purposes of the rifle clubs and against a background of rising public knowledge of and interest in national defence matters, membership of rifle clubs was on the rise again. By early 1908 Deakin’s proposal for a National Guard and three years of military training for every able-bodied male citizen, preceded by service with the cadets where boys would learn the fundamentals of military life like drill and rifle shooting, was beginning to take shape.494 It would take several years of debate and legislation before the final version of universal military training became a reality, but sentiment in support of such a scheme was growing fast. A robust Australian defence was considered more and more essential if Australia was to be kept safe. Men who could not join the militia should join rifle clubs.
The net result was that rifle club membership was on the rise. By 30 June 1907, there were 42,890 rifle club men; at the beginning of 1908, there were 880 rifle clubs with 45,293 members. But as
493 H.J. Foster, ‘The Battle Value of Good Rifle Shooting’, The Call: Journal of the Australian National Defence League, No.4, May 1907, pp. 4-5, and ‘The Battle Value of Marksmanship II’, The Call: Journal of the Australian National Defence League, No.4, August 1907, pp. 8-10. 494 Advertiser, 7 January 1908, p.6, and West Australian, 1 February 1908, p. 12. 14
Hoad noted in his first annual report as Inspector-General, delivered in March 1908, only 60 per cent of riflemen had completed their musketry course in 1907, indicating that aversion to military regulations was as strong as ever. 495 While military men like Colonel Foster, writing in the journal of the NDL, believed rifle fire by infantry should be massed and directed, many riflemen argued that it was the individual sharp shooter who could determine infantry success in battle. Military men believed that riflemen must be able to manoeuvre to bring to bear their rifle fire at the critical point of the battlefield.496 On the other hand, the rifle club men believed that drill was unnecessary—or at least just not as important as rifle shooting skills.
Nonetheless, a public and political consensus grew that a compulsory scheme was required; the school cadet movement was boosted and in early 1908 Lord Roberts in England introduced an Imperial [Empire-wide] cadet rifle shooting scheme, which Australia enthusiastically supported.497 In fact that year saw a spate of Empire styled matches including the Lord Roberts Cup for the school cadets, an Empire Postal Services match, and the Daily Mail’s Empire Trophy, competed for by nearly 2,000 rifle clubs around the world, in which Australian rifle clubs figured prominently. Even the military got involved with an Empire-wide competition for teams of 40, the inaugural Schumacher Cup, named after its leading advocate Lieutenant-Colonel Schumacher of South Africa.498
495 Year Book Australia, No.1, Section 28, Defence, Australian Bureau of Statistics Canberra, 1908, p.889 and the Advertiser, 20 March 1908, p. 6. 496 Thinly disguised columns in newspapers pushed the military viewpoint, along with letters to the editor. See for example, West Australian, 2 January 1908, p. 7 and 18 July 1908, p. 8 and Sydney Morning Herald, 13 October 1908, p. 8. 497 C.A.J. Stockings, The Torch and the Sword, UNSW Press, Sydney, 2007, p. 51. 498 In the first competition, the Schumacher Cup was won by a Ballarat Militia regiment. Although there was no Empire Match in 1908, the 1908 Olympics, held that year in London, saw rifle shooting introduced as a sport for the first time. Sergeant Sidney A. Green from the Australian Rifle Regiment in Sydney, competing as his regiment’s representative at Bisley that year, was put forward as a possible contender. Sydney Morning Herald, 13 May 1908, p. 10. But in the end it appeared that only one Australian had competed, one William Hill, in three small-bore competitions. No formal record of Green’s participation has been found despite reliable claims that he had competed. Perhaps his score was simply too low to be officially recorded. T.A. Cook, The Fourth Olympiad being the Official Report - The Olympic Games 1908, British Olympics Association, London, 1908, pp. 254-83. It is not known whether Hill was a formal member of the combined Australian-New Zealand team. He was noted in 1910 as a vice- president of the Victorian Amateur Athletics Association. 15
Meanwhile, a lively and often heated newspaper war continued between correspondents writing for and against the rifle club approach to rifle shooting. This was no small matter. Military writers universally criticised the rifle club men and their deliberate target shooting as being a poor preparation for war; the rifle club writers criticised in turn the militia’s lack of individual skill with the rifle and their capacity for accuracy.499 But everyone fretted about defence matters, with hundreds of columns and letters to the editor that year. State Commandants urged riflemen to attend camps of training with the militia; very few did. In Melbourne, in 1908 and after three attempts, 730 men paraded at Williamstown; in Ballarat only 150 of over 1,600 riflemen in the district turned up.500
In Western Australia, the state Commandant, Lieutenant-Colonel Haviland Le Mesurier, was so frustrated by the attitudes of the two rifle associations there towards service conditions rifle shooting that he formed his own Military Rifle Association, emulating the DFRA formed by French in NSW in 1898. 501 It was rumoured that when Le Mesurier left suddenly to take up a new post in NSW in 1909, it was because he had been forced out by the many complaints about him, not least by the rifle associations—the fact that he was replaced by Colonel G. G. H. Irving, with his impeccable rifle shooting pedigree, was seen as evidence of this.502 Meanwhile, rifle associations bemoaned the small turnouts by Militia for association service matches.503
499 Some examples of this can be found in the West Australian, 4 May 1907, p.8., the Advertiser, 30 March 1908, p. 6, and more formally in H.J. Foster, ‘The Battle Value of Good Rifle Shooting’, The Call: Journal of the Australian National Defence League, No.4, May 1907, pp. 4-5 and ‘The Battle Value of Marksmanship II’, The Call: Journal of the Australian National Defence League, No.4, August 1907, pp. 8-10. 500 Argus, 13 April 1908, p. 9 and 11 May 1908, p. 5. 501 West Australian, 29 January 1909, p. 9. 502 West Australian, 14 July 1909, p. 4. 503 Report of the National Rifle Association of New South Wales, Sydney, 1908, Duncan and Macindoe, Sydney, 1909, pp. 8-9 and the Sydney Morning Herald, 14 May 1908, p. 7. 16
By mid-1908, the number of riflemen in Australia had risen sharply again, to over 53,000, now more than double the size of the entire Australian Militia force of about 23,000. 504 In addition, the rifle club movement and defence were about to receive a boost in interest, for the Americans were coming to Australia. In December 1907 US President, Theodore Roosevelt, decided to send a US Navy Fleet, painted white to represent its peaceful intentions, on a round-the-world trip to show the American flag. The voyage was to last almost two years. Prime Minister Deakin saw an opportunity to counter growing Japanese strength in the Pacific, as well as prosecute his case with the British for an Australian fleet at home, by inviting the US fleet to visit Australia. The US fleet consisted of 16 battleships and five auxiliaries and created a sensation when it visited Sydney, Melbourne and Albany in Western Australia over the period August and September 1908.505
In Sydney a rifle match was arranged against a visiting US naval team at Randwick, on 26 August. Unlike the Japanese, the team camped at Randwick for a week before the match, practising assiduously. It was 20 a side, with seven shots at 200, 500 and 600 yards. The Americans won at every range in what the NRA of NSW later described as a ‘social event’, with a local team ‘selected more as an entertainment team than a strong shooting body, and nobody ever thought that they had a chance of winning’. 506 The US ‘sharp-pointed’ ammunition proved superior against the British issue rounds used by the local riflemen, being significantly faster—at 600 yards the Americans were using 10° less elevation than the Australians.507 By way of comparison with the 1906 visit by Imperial Japanese Navy men to Randwick, here the luncheon was well-attended by the Minister for Defence Thomas Thomson Ewing, and Colonel Davies of the CCRAA. 508
When the US Fleet, now dubbed ‘The Great White Fleet’, visited Melbourne, again the Americans defeated a local rifle team when they shot against the Melbourne Rifle Club at
504 Year Book Australia, No.2, Section 28, Defence, Australian Bureau of Statistics Canberra, 1909, p.1083. 505 Townsville Daily Bulletin, 20 August 1908, p. 7, Evening News, 20 August 1908, p.7, and the Argus, 1 September 1908, p. 7. 506 Sydney Morning Herald, 27 August 1908, p. 8. 507 ibid. 508 ibid. 17
Williamstown in a 15 men-a-side match at 200, 500 and 600 yards. Once more the Americans took time to get used to the local conditions. The Melbourne Rifle Club made no pretence of a social meeting—they put forward their very best shots, including Philip Fargher and John Alexander Ross who had both represented Victoria and Australia at Bisley (and both of whom had been CCRAA delegates). It was to no avail, for the Americans won by over 100 points using their new M1903 Model, .30-06-inch calibre Springfield service rifles with peephole sights—and the sharp-tipped bullets which had so impressed the NSW men at Randwick.509 The scale of the rifle matches between the Americans and the local clubs in 1908 was bigger than anything the Japanese had managed to inspire in their visits of 1903 and 1906, but there was a huge difference in the size of the fleets and purpose of the visits.
After the excitement of the Great White Fleet, it was an anticlimax to return to the federal administration of the rifle club movement, with the CCRAA’s annual meeting held in Adelaide in late September 1908. The meeting was overshadowed by the recent death of Templeton. It was the passing of an era. Templeton had dominated the rifle club movement since the first meeting of the General Council in 1888, and had influenced every facet of it. He had been an ardent supporter of Empire, Federation and of the independence of rifle associations from the military. Templeton had given solid personal service—as a Volunteer and Militia officer, in public service, and in business—to Victoria and to Australia. His experience, if not his bullishness, would be sorely missed by most in the rifle club movement. Even those like Hutton, who saw Templeton as too powerful and independent, would have been among the first to recognise and praise his outstanding contribution. Templeton’s contribution was recognised in both Australia and in England, where he was accorded the ultimate accolade of an obituary in The Times.510
509 While in Melbourne, American junior officers also fired a friendly match against the Commonwealth Ladies Rifle Club, fired on the Moonee Valley Racecourse on 4 September, probably with .230-inch calibre Francotte rifles were used by both sides. Although this was almost certainly a social event, the ladies still took it very seriously, winning by 75 points. Argus, 5 September 1908, p. 15. 510 Templeton was also influential in Government and business. The Times, 12 June 1908, p. 15. 18
At the 1908 meeting, with a new constitution for the CCRAA approved by the Military Board, Davies from Tasmania returned as CCRAA chairman, the first time a chairman came from the ranks of the Council itself. There were no more ex-officio members, although on this occasion, guests included Colonel Ernest Townshend Wallack, the Adjutant-General of Commonwealth Military Forces and member of the Military Board and Colonel John Henry Alexander Lee, the South Australian Commandant. The Council meeting discussed, as usual, approaching the Commonwealth for funds to support a team to Bisley in 1909, but no Government funds were forthcoming and as a result 1909 was another dead year as far as an Australian team to Bisley was concerned.511
Despite a formal invitation from the Americans to join the Palma matches to be held in the US in 1909, funding remained the major problem across the board. The rifle club movement was suffering from years of neglect by successive Australian governments. As reflected in newspaper reports, association annual reports and letters to the editor of the period, riflemen everywhere were seeing much talk but little action around issues like replacement of worn-out barrels, provision of uniforms, upkeep of ranges or provision of new ranges for the ever-popular rifle clubs. Even the new Short Magazine Lee-Enfield (SMLE) .303-inch service rifles were being doled out to rifle clubs in meagre numbers—one rifle per ten men.512 An attempt by the Prime Minister Andrew Fisher to obtain a long service medal for riflemen who had seen 20 years’ service and who had been deemed ‘efficient’ for 20 successive years, was not accepted in England, perhaps because it might set a precedent for the National Rifle Association in the UK.513 Feelings were summed up in a pamphlet circulated in 1909:
There is something about our Rifle Club Movement which causes it to be viewed with feelings of misgiving by many honest-minded military men of the Conservative type, and by those who claim to be progressive it is regarded as something which must be understood, and in some way
511 Sydney Morning Herald, 30 November 1908, p. 8. 512 Argus, 10 March 1909, p. 6. 513 ‘Letter from Fisher to Dudley, 14 November 1908’, NAA A6661, Item 420474. 19
identified with the military forces. It is quite possible that the movement has more to fear from its military friends than from those pronouncedly hostile.514
By late 1909 there were more than 57, 000 men in rifle clubs but the system was creaking at the seams, with the number of ‘efficients’ actually decreasing by 5 per cent over the previous year alone.515 The struggle for the Australian Government to provide for defence needs in a time of rising expectations was matched by military exasperation with the movement. Despite a large investment in service shooting matches and prizes, culminating in the great rifle matches of the NRA of NSW’s Jubilee where over 3,000 civilian and Militia riflemen competed, members of the Militia often chose not to compete in civilian match rifles in association competitions. One reason put forward was that they could not compete against club men who invested heavily in match rifles and shooting aids. Meanwhile the riflemen argued that service matches where they had to employ rapid fire wore out their barrels and cost them much in ammunition.516 Even Joseph Cook, defence minister in Alfred Deakin’s third government, acknowledged in parliament that:
it would take three to four weeks after war was declared to build the field force to war strength by recruiting rifle club members and then bringing its brigades to their nearest capital cities. Such was the strength of the rifle club movement that there would be a great surplus of riflemen. But they would be unorganized, untrained, without officers and equipment, and so, according to prevailing doctrine, militarily useless.517
A new Defence Act was finally passed in September 1909, which called for universal military training.518 Soon after, with the final retirement of Sir John George Davies, after 21 years of service to the CCRAA and its predecessors, another great stalwart stepped down from active leadership of the rifle shooting movement. Throughout 1909, the CCRAA was engaged in a wide range of complex matters, many directly or indirectly related to defence. The conditions of the Commonwealth Match for ranges and style of target, as well as allowing rear aperture sights, were
514 J.B. Campbell, The Rifle Club Movement: a distinct factor in the defence problem, p. 3. 515 Brisbane Courier, 11 September 1909, p. 4 and the Argus, 4 October 1909, p. 5. 516 Argus, 10 November 1909, p.6. 517 C. Wilcox, For Hearths and Homes: Citizen Soldiering in Australia 1854-1945, Sydney, Allen & Unwin, Sydney, 1998, Ch.6, p. 34. 518 Advertiser, 22 September 1909, p. 7. 20
amended and set to be fired in 1910. The finals of the Light Horse Prince of Wales and Hutton Trophy Matches would also be shot that year, while the service Gordon Highlanders Match, a fire and movement competition, would be shot in New Zealand in March 1910. The international Empire Match would be fired at Bisley. The Council once again resolved to send a team to compete for both Kolapore Cup and Empire Match trophy (the trophy was not yet obtained) in 1910, and Government funds were confirmed in August 1909. The Council also urged the production of the ‘new territorial rifle’ at the proposed Commonwealth Small Arms Factory at Lithgow in NSW, ‘seeing such excellent results have been obtained with the weapon’.519
At this juncture, in late 1909, the Australian Government invited Lord Kitchener to visit Australia, in effect, to endorse its scheme of compulsory military service.520 In a whirlwind visit around Australia over December 1909-January 1910, Kitchener did just that. One consequence of his report was the recommendation for Australia to be organised around training areas.521 He also suggested more staff for administering rifle clubs, and Major M. M. Boam, the Staff Officer for Rifle Clubs in Victoria since 1902, was subsequently appointed in early 1911 as the first Commonwealth Director of Rifle Associations and Clubs (DRAC) reporting to the Army’s Adjutant-General. By the beginning of 1910, Lord Kitchener’s endorsement of Government defence policy was in hand, the cadet movement well established and the structure of the militia and universal military training being prepared to accommodate the planned thousands of trained men for the militia. The rifle clubs were now placed, philosophically and practically, as the third tier of defence for those men who had completed their militia service or who were in some other way unable to do training.522 It seemed that all was complete, and rifle clubs officially recognised as part of the formal Australian defence structure, but there were major problems in the system.
519 Advertiser, 16 October 1909, p. 11. 520 Field Marshal Viscount Kitchener of Khartoum, G.C.B., O.M., G.C.S.I., G.C.M.G., G.C.L.E., etc. to give the full title at the time. 521 Kitchener, Field Marshal, Viscount of Khartoum, GCB, etc., Memorandum on the Defence of Australia, J. Kemp, Govt. Printer, Melbourne, 1910, pp. 8-12. 522 Advertiser, 22 September 1909, p. 7. Those in rifle clubs as reserves, under the scheme, were over 26 years old. 21
Until the new rifle factory at Lithgow could get manufacturing underway, there remained a chronic shortage of rifles. The rifle clubs were eventually promised a single modern magazine SMLE on loan between five men, instead of between ten.523 The Australian Government was stretched thin indeed trying to maintain a very small army of 26,000 militia let alone the riflemen with their seemingly endless requests for more amounts of money. Throughout this period of rapid change in the defence structure, the impact on rifle clubs and their associations were profound. Suddenly there were questions about riflemen’s fitness levels; mobilisation plans were drawn up, more pressure than ever was applied to induce rifle club men to wear uniform, drill and join militia training. Queenslander Alexander Ferguson’s tenure as a member of the Military Board was extended but some were disappointed that rifle club movement representation on the Board was not greater; others were still resentful that long service medals were not awarded.524 A fundamental tension remained—the Government wanted the rifle clubs to be the ‘third line of defence’ but was financially constricted and struggled to fund the universal training program as a whole. But the associations and rifle clubs demanded more and more resources, without which they maintained that they could not wear uniforms or drill. So in effect little changed—rifle clubs and associations continued to get the same funding support—their grants—which they always had, and nothing more.
At this time, the programmes of the state association matches, despite all the ostensible efforts to conform to the military’s desires for shooting under service conditions, were essentially the same as they were twenty years before. There were a few service matches, but by and large the associations remained wedded to their fixed target matches and continued to argue vehemently that the marksman was the key to good rifle shooting, and success on the battlefield. This occurred even when military men held a dominant position ex officio on the councils.525 As one South Australian military officer was later to put it:
523 Lithgow officially opened on 8 June 1912. T. Griffiths, Lithgow's Small Arms Factory and Its People 1907-1950, Vol.1, Toptech Engineering, Terry Hills, 2006, p. 87. 524 ‘Letter from Office of British Prime Minister to Dudley 10 March 1909’, NAA A6661, Item 420474. 525 For example, SANRA had 16 ex officio members and only 12 elected. South Australian National Rifle Association: Official Programme and Scoring Book September 1909 [incl. 22nd Annual Prize Meeting report for September 1908 and SANRA Annual Report for year ending May 1909], Whillas & Ormiston, Adelaide, 1909, p. 48. 22
[There are complaints] about the lack of co-operation between the Military Department and the rifle clubs. This has always been the cry for many years, and it does not seem that the matter will ever be got over unless a universal rifle is used. The military man has no use for telescopic sights, long barrels, peep sights, and long, slow aiming. He must have the rifle that will stand the wear and tear of a campaign. He wants a man who can load and fire rapidly, and fairly accurately, at moving figures as well as almost invisible earthworks. The military shot has to learn to judge distance, how to take cover, and render covering fire. In other words, the military rifleman shoots collectively, and forms a beaten zone, whereas the rifle shot is a bullseye man. He requires the exact range, the exact wind, and plenty of time to sight. So long as they are shooting under such vastly different conditions there will never be any co-operation between the two. 526
When universal military training got underway in earnest in 1911, relations between the rifle club movement and its associations with the military reached a critical impasse.
While the greater matters of Australia’s defence affecting the very future of the rifle club movement continued to evolve, the CCRAA and the State rifle associations remained preoccupied with the status quo, fatally confused as to their raison d’être. Was it to act as an arm of the military and feed its needs for the battlefield, or was it to provide the means for the common man to defend ‘hearth and homes’ or was it for sport and enjoyment? There was no easy answer to this conundrum. Despite the introduction of Rifle Club Regulations in 1904 and the plan to introduce universal military training in 1910, the rifle clubs in the main had failed to pay anything but lip service to the military intent to integrate the rifle clubs as comprehensively as possible into the increasingly serious effort by Australia to develop an effective defence force structure. Men in rifle clubs were, it appeared, interested only in receiving free ammunition and new rifles, but not willing in the main to give anything back. An editorial in the Argus called it ‘something lacking’ in rifle clubs, which had ‘failed to fulfill their destiny’ as a reserve in the organised military forces in time of emergency.527
526 Advertiser, 24 August 1912, p. 7. 527 Argus, 7 September 1909, p. 4. 23
Subsequently, the Militia’s senior officers began to disregard the rifle clubs and treat them with some disdain, despite the fraternal feelings which may have existed at the lower levels of the rifle club movement and Militia, underpinned by the common tools and practices of the rifle range. Increasingly, or rather more than ever, the military establishment recognised the rifle club men for what they actually were, that is, interested primarily in the sport of target rifle shooting, and therefore, an unreliable reserve for the Army.528 Paradoxically, the leadership of the rifle club movement, although understanding of the military requirements and imbued with loyalty to the military ethos and tradition, were nonetheless equally sympathetic to their own members throughout Australia, many of them now civilians with little interest in maneouvres and drill.529 Caught between the competing agendas of the two institutions, the rifle club leadership tried to appease both sides without success.
The government needed cheap defence manpower but was reluctant to enforce the military discipline upon rifle club members who, after all, were potentially a political factor in electorates right across Australia. The rifle associations in the states, dependent upon the rifle club men for the large part of their revenue, could not break free from their need to conduct prize shooting matches. The military, despite bullying the rifle club movement as far as it could towards its military viewpoint, could not, in the end, control the rifle club movement. Those rifle club men who were militarily inclined, joined the Militia; but most rifle club men did not. The coming period of universal military training and a growing emphasis on preparing for a war outside of Australian soil would exacerbate even further the antipathy felt between the two camps, despite the good will expressed at a personal level by individuals on both sides.
528 ‘Of course many riflemen are not physically fit for military service, but in most cases it is purely disinclination.’ Sydney Morning Herald, 15 October 1908, p. 1. 529 In one instance in Brisbane, when rifle club captains were appealed to by the Officer Supervising Rifle Clubs in Queensland to join military maneouvres, he stressed that the club men would not be expected to wear uniform and ‘will not be asked to do any manual exercises or intricate movements.’ Apparently to do otherwise ran the risk of not having any riflemen turn up for the muster. Brisbane Courier, 1 July 1908, p. 5. 24
Chapter 7
To shoot or drill 1911-1918
In 1911 the attention of the Australian military forces was focused on the introduction of the universal training scheme. Meanwhile, the rifle club movement continued on its usual programme of annual club, district and State association, and Commonwealth matches. With the exception of South Australia, the state rifle associations seemed almost oblivious to the hostility towards them growing ever stronger in military circles. Well-entrenched with political and by any measure, popular support, the rifle club movement felt itself impervious to criticism.
The ongoing debate between the Army and rifle clubs over service versus target shooting continued in the period 1911-1914, with neither side accepting the other’s point of view. In a curious move, given the tenuous state of relations with Defence, the NRA of NSW decided to abolish service matches altogether from its October 1911 programme. It reasoned that there had been such a dearth of military entries for those matches it could no longer afford to continue them, despite the fact that they were obliged to devote half of the prize money grants to such military matches.530 Military men defended themselves when the question was asked why the citizen forces did not compete in greater numbers in service matches. One commentator explained that soldiers were disadvantaged at the range:
having to wear equipment, conduct a route march and have points deducted accordingly while the Rifle Clubs entries have no such deductions for the same shoot as they don’t have to wear equipment and just turn up; also the service teams are not allowed to choose their teams from
530 M. Purser, ‘Some Reasons why the Citizen Forces do not Compete at N.R.A. Meetings’, The Commonwealth Military Journal, Vol.6, 1915, Albert J. Mullett, Govt. Printer, Melbourne, p. 556. ‘Serious concern was caused in 1911 by an announcement from the Director of Rifle Clubs that at least 50 per cent of the Government Grant for prizes must be allotted to Service Matches and that entry fees must be limited to 1/6 per match. The Government Grant was £1911/12/-. A deputation succeeded, however, in having the decision deferred for, at any rate, one year.’ C.H. Cromack, The History of the National Rifle Association of New South Wales, 1860-1956, pp. 47-48. 1
members of the Regimental Rifle Clubs – as these are not RAN ships, batteries, companies, squadrons but ‘rifle clubs.531
In South Australia, on the other hand, sympathy for military aspects of rifle matches ran strong. The SANRA council ‘had 23 ex-officio [military] members and 12 elected…the 25th Programme included a battle firing match [a fire and movement match]; a Teams Service Match [unknown distances, pop-up targets on the advance] and Squad Snap-Shooting.’532 Overall however, the rifle club movement came under increasing pressure to conform as the measures associated with the universal military training scheme took effect:
In 1911 [the Military Board] required club captains to strike off any members who failed to qualify as efficient for two years in a row; next year it decided that clubs without efficient members for two years would be disbanded. The number of riflemen fell by 5,000 in a year, but headquarters was pleased that “dead-heads”, as one Permanent officer described poor shots, were being struck from the rolls. During 1911 headquarters staff proceeded to plan how riflemen would be used in war, and allotted the fittest club members to fill local units in war. 533
The Director of Rifle Associations and Clubs (DRAC), Major M. M. Boam, introduced updated Rifle Club Regulations, which gave him the power to administer and control every aspect of the operations of associations through to rifle clubs, including the CCRAA.534 Somewhat controversially it was the DRAC who would distribute grant money to associations.535 Boam’s new Rifle Club Regulations, especially with regard to the administration of association affairs (powers now given to Boam or Military District (State) commanders), directly undermined the authority of the associations to conduct their own business affairs.
531 M. Purser, ‘Some Reasons why the Citizen Forces do not Compete at N.R.A. Meetings’, p. 556. 532 South Australian National Rifle Association: Official Programme and Scoring Book September 1911 [incl. 24th Annual Prize Meeting report for September 1910 and SANRA Annual Report for year ending May 1911], Whillas & Ormiston, Adelaide, 1911, pp. 54-55. 533 C. Wilcox, ‘Australia’s Citizen Army 1889-1914’, Ch.7, pp. 43-44. 534 Boam had served with the NSW Forces since 1873 and was a veteran of the Soudan Expedition. 535 Advertiser, 28 March 1911, p. 8. 2
Meanwhile, the CCRAA made a conciliatory but token gesture to the Army by instructing all teams in the Commonwealth Match at Karrakatta in Western Australia in 1911 to wear uniform.536 The CCRAA also determined—in an attempt to recover the powers it had before the new Rifle Club Regulations were issued—to have Military Regulations amended to recognise properly the role of the CCRAA and state rifle associations as advisors to the Minister for Defence and Military District commanders on rifle shooting matters. Military units were to be asked again through the Minister, to pay for the entrance fees for military teams in service matches hence avoiding the personal payment by military team members to enter matches, considered a major reason for why military entries continued to decline.537
By 1912 the universal military training scheme was well underway, and rifle clubs began to feel the impact as already scarce rifle ranges came under even more time use pressure by increased numbers of cadets and recruits firing their mandatory musketry courses. This was especially felt by clubs in WA, where by 1913 the frustration began to assume political overtones. A rifle association ‘Vigilance Committee’ was formed which threatened to urge a vote against Defence Minister (and Western Australian Senator) George Foster Pearce if rifle clubs did not receive promised improvements to their resources.538 Despite the grumblings, military control of the rifle club movement in most States continued to grow tighter as universal training grew apace. By 30 June 1912 the numbers in rifle clubs in the states (the Northern Territory did not register except as part of South Australia’s numbers), were as follows:
NSW VIC QLD SA WA TAS Total Rifle Clubs 12,580 17,026 9,437 5,421 4,510 1,647 50,621
536 West Australian, 16 November 1911, p. 8. 537 West Australian, 17 November 1911, p. 8. 538 ‘Rifle Clubs Vigilance Committee of W.A. Circular 10 May 1913’, State Records Office of Western Australia, 2616A/7b. 3
In addition, this 1913 report on Australia’s defences indicated that out of 23,696 in the Militia, only 77 officers and NCOs were dedicated to the Pay Department, rifle ranges and rifle clubs. 539
It was in this atmosphere that the CCRAA met again in Hobart in late December 1912. One key attendee was Major Francis Bede Heritage from the School of Musketry at Randwick. In his treatise Modern Musketry Training, published in 1911, he wrote:
Rifle training must be a duty rather than a sport. It is necessary to insist on this because to-day many people, a few even in the army, regard all rifle shooting primarily as a sport, and advocate the use of weapons and rifle accessories which are not suitable for war conditions.
An extraordinary degree of skill in applying a long series of shots at a stationary mark when each shot is signaled and all service difficulties are carefully eliminated is of little value for war purposes. War is not a matter for individuals. Battles are not fought between picked teams, but between battalions, and, therefore, the general standard of marksmanship should be as high as possible. There are no spotting discs in war. A soldier must be a fighting shot – not merely a rifle club shot. 540
Another attendee at the Hobart meeting was Boam’s replacement as DRAC, Major William Henry Osborne.541
Ammunition was a pressing issue of concern to the rifle club movement in 1912. The Army’s Ordnance Department insisted that the 1912 ammunition was acceptable but strong complaints had come in from NSW and South Australia about the quality of the 1912 batch: ‘Tests were made in the presence of Major F. B. Heritage, Commandant of the School of Musketry, and showed that not only were the bullets of irregular sizes, but some cartridges were so loosely packed that the cordite could be heard rattling in the shell.’542 Major Heritage was also asked to develop a scheme by which all men over 16 in ‘exempt areas’—and therefore not required to drill under universal training—be
539 Year Book Australia, No.6, Section 28, Defence, Australian Bureau of Statistics Canberra, 1913, p. 1047. 540 F.B. Heritage, ‘Modern Musketry Training’, The Commonwealth Military Journal, Vol.1, April-December 1911, J. Kemp, Govt. Printer, Melbourne, 1911, pp. 147-8. 541 In 1920 the now Lieutenant-Colonel Osborne was awarded an MBE for his services to rifle shooting. 542 Brisbane Courier, 14 October 1912, p. 8. 4
compelled to join the nearest rifle club.543 CCRAA Chairman Lieutenant-Colonel Charles Edward Merrett was appointed as commandant for the Australian team to Bisley in early 1914 and welcome news arrived of a proposed tour by a British rifle team to Australia in September 1914.544 The future looked bright for competition target rifle shooting in Australia.
At this juncture, in early 1914, amid rising concern about the possibility of a general war in Europe, yet another inspection of Australia’s defence arrangements by an Imperial officer occurred when General Sir Ian Hamilton arrived at the invitation of the Government. Like Lord Kitchener before him, Hamilton toured through most of the country before providing a high level report to Parliament. He inspected rifle club parades organised for him and pronounced himself to be happy enough: ‘I have noticed that, when being assembled for inspection or to be addressed, they show themselves capable of performing the more elementary military movements’. 545 But he also had a more important comment and warning: ‘Rifle Clubs constitute the only reserve for the Militia Forces’, he said, [and] ‘so long as the Rifle Clubs form the only reserve for the active army, Australian defence must rest on too narrow a foundation.’ 546 He went on to say: ‘Everything outside of the Militia—the Regular Force for example, the Rifle Clubs and the cadets—are essentially of military interest and value only in so far as they affect the well-being of Australia’s real war instrument—her Militia army.’ 547
In July 1914, the DRAC, Major Osborne, completed his first report to Parliament on the state of the rifle clubs in Australia, a report informed by his visits to almost every rifle club in the country
543 Exempt areas were those with no training zone allocated under Kitchener’s 1910 scheme. This normally meant that these areas were too remote and had too sparse a population base to justify Defence resources to set up units or training. The Military Board did not agree with the proposal, citing the need to amend the Defence Act if this were the case, and the cost of running such a scheme. 544 Brisbane Courier, 23 January 1914, p. 6 and the Mercury, 23 January 1914, p. 8. 545 I. Hamilton, Report on an Inspection of the Military Forces of the Commonwealth of Australia, Albert J. Mullett, Govt. Printer, Melbourne, 1913, pp. 14-6. 546 ibid., pp. 14-6. 547 ibid., p. 7. 5
since January 1913. 548 Osborne reported that on 1 July 1914, compared to the same time in 1913, the state of the movement was as follows:
1 July 1 July Military 1913 1914 District Clubs Members Efficients percent Clubs Members Efficients Percent 1st Qld 211 9701 6399 66 227 9758 6963 71 2nd NSW 293 13,400 11,264 84 305 14,500 10,708 74 3rd Vic 322 15,617 10,220 65 318 14,505 10,064 69 4th SA 120 5408 3123 58 119 4093 3411 83 5th WA 142 3809 2896 76 127 3790 2826 75 6th Tas 45 1629 1148 71 46 1580 1108 70 1,133 49,564 35,050 71 1,142 48,226 35,080 73
Osborne noted that the number of rifle ranges in operation had risen to 798 and that there were a total of 64 District Rifle Club Unions throughout the country. Government grants had been handed out as follows—CCRAA £700, State associations, £5,000, DRCUs £5,000, and remote area unions and clubs £5,000—giving out £15,700.549
Considering the size of the rifle club movement, this was a cheap defence reserve indeed, even when adding the cost of range construction and maintenance and salaries of the rifle club supervisors and range inspectors (the 800,000 rounds of ammunition expended annually was purchased by riflemen at a discount). Osborne’s report addressed at length the dramatic falling off of Militia riflemen competing in rifle association and district union competitions. There was, he said, no clear reason for this occurring although he had noted that in many instances, Commanding Officers of Militia units just happened to call their weekly parades when these matches were to be
548 ‘Report on the State Rifle Associations, District Rifle Club Unions, and Rifle Clubs for the year ended 30 June 1914’, Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia, 2 December 1914, Albert J. Mullett, Govt. Printer Victoria, Melbourne, 1914, pp. 1-8. 549 ‘Report on the State Rifle Associations, District Rifle Club Unions, and Rifle Clubs for the year ended 30 June 1914’, Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia, 2 December 1914, Albert J. Mullett, Govt. Printer Victoria, 1914, pp.3-5. 6
held. Osborne’s summary was blunt: ‘It seems a hard thing to say, but it would seem that the Rifle Clubs are composed of men who can shoot but can’t drill, while the Citizen Forces can drill but can’t shoot; if they can, they are very modest about it.’ 550 In defence of the Militia however, a table was later produced by one commentator to show how Militia riflemen were disadvantaged in target shooting against rifle club men:
Citizen Forces Rifle Clubs Short rifle Long rifle Better service weapon Better for prize shooting + aids available for it No alterations to sights verniers, orthoptics, coloured pencils, No additions, colouring, blackening, orthoptics paints, elbow pads etc Use of slings discouraged Use of slings encouraged Fire at quick rate – 1 shot/20 secs 1 shot/60 secs Minimize wind and elevation changes Alter for wind and elevation as often as liked No changes after first shot Cannot practice as often Many more opportunities for practice
It was clear that the soldier’s training was in the direction of making him a ‘war shot’ and not a ‘pot hunter,’ and this being so ‘he cannot hope to compete successfully with the rifleman at prize meetings.’551 However, the wheel was fast turning in favour of the Militia and service shooting. Mobilisation schemes were now prepared for each state. Rifle clubs, of which the ‘efficients’ were expected to be available in time of war, were allocated to militia units—‘3,000 to the Light Horse, 15,000 to the infantry, 1,500 to Army service and medical corps, 120 to be cable guards, and 9,000 for future allotment.’552 But the rifle club men still had no uniforms, few modern service rifles, and certainly were not being used in any meaningful way to assist in training the recruits into the Militia or cadet force with basic rifle skills. In a speech made in July 1914, the new Defence Minister, Senator Edward Millen, promised to ensure an annual allocation of funds rifle teams to compete at Bisley in the UK as well as increase the allocation of service rifles to clubs to bring the ratio up to 1:2 men; but the Minister still baulked at the cost of uniforms. He noted the ongoing antipathy of
550 ibid., p.7. 551 M. Purser, ‘Some Reasons why the Citizen Forces do not Compete at N.R.A. Meetings’, pp. 555-6. 552 Sydney Morning Herald, 14 July 1914, p. 9. 7
Militia officers to the rifle clubs but felt that Australia had no choice but to depend on the riflemen as its own ready reserve.553
Millen’s stance was underpinned by Australian success at Bisley in mid-1914 when the team won both the Kolapore Cup and the McKinnon Trophy along with numerous other prizes, to much acclaim. The Bisley matches took place in an atmosphere, not dis-similar to that pertaining in Australia, in that the British War Office was pressuring the NRA to change its sacred ‘King’s’ Match and more. The War Office wanted:
[U]se of rifles as issued; no orthoptics; no slings; no apertures as sights; rapid firing in the King's Match; rapid firing in the St. George's Match; military targets at all ranges up to and including 600 yards; and lastly, a time limit of 20 seconds per shot for deliberate shooting, with an addendum that the N.R.A. might alter the conditions of their competitors from time to time to comply with the musketry regulations. Sighters, of course, had been abolished for some time.554
The Australian team captain, Merrett, took the opportunity to register his disagreement with the War Office and observed:
Australians would refuse to accept the War Office proposal to dispense with bull’s-eye shooting and introduce service conditions—namely, shooting at figure and moving targets—because it would mean the décadence of rifle clubs, on which rested Australia's second line of defence. No Australian Government would accept the War Office ultimatum.555
Still, with the upbeat results and positive publicity from Bisley and the expected arrival of the British rifle team in September, the rifle club movement had no reason not to anticipate a bumper year ahead.
When war broke out in Europe in 1914, the Australian rifle associations cancelled the various prize meetings planned for that year, including the Commonwealth match in Adelaide, and offered
553 Sydney Morning Herald, 13 July 1914, p. 11. 554 Advertiser, 14 September 1914, p. 13. 555 Argus, 23 July 1914, p.9. 8
their services to train Expeditionary Force recruits in musketry.556 In Sydney, 40 riflemen were requested to support training at Long Bay while 30 Victorian club members assisted Army NCOs with training at the Williamstown range. Rifle clubs quickly subscribed to supporting activities like the Regimental Comforts Funds in NSW and the Motor Ambulance Fund in Tasmania. In Victoria, 1,200 rifle club men paraded as part of a Patriotic Carnival in September 1914.557 In these early days of the war, there was still an element of wait and see, even optimism that it would be all over quickly and life could revert to normal. But the onset of war immediately began to draw many riflemen into military service. In Katoomba, NSW, Senator Millen had attended the 24th Katoomba rifle club annual meeting in July where he gave a patriotic speech in support of rifle clubs and defence. As a result of Senator Millen’s visit, ‘the club rallied as never before with 77 members offering their services one August day in 1914.’558
Still, no-one expected the war to last very long. In South Australia, not surprisingly, the German Kingship rifle clubs were faced with anti-German sentiments. The Hahndorf club decided not to hold any Kingship matches for the duration of the conflict, but the Tanunda, Lobethal, Metropolitan and Oakbank clubs all continued to hold their annual matches, at least at first. These were well attended by both shooters and the general public and the events were well covered in the SA newspapers. 559
In the early months of the war, as the gears of the military plans for mobilisation started to engage and frantic preparations began to raise, equip and despatch an expeditionary force overseas (the Australian Imperial Force or AIF), riflemen questioned whether they should continue to drill as part of their prescribed Militia units or should instead form their own rifle brigade? However, as hundreds, then thousands rushed to the colours, many rifle clubs soon felt the loss of their ablest
556 The NRA immediately cancelled the visit of the British team to Australia until after the war and Bisley was placed at the full disposal of the British Army. 557 Anon., ‘Those were the Days - Parade of Riflemen’, The Marksman, Vol.21, No.3, March 1969, p. 4. 558 C. Roberts, From Cascade to Wentworth Creek: a History of Katoomba Rifle Club1893-1988, Katoomba Rifle Club Committee, Lawson, 1988, p. 28. 559 V. Potezny, ‘South Australian German Shooting Companies (Kingship and Ring Target Shooting)’, p. 3. 9
and fittest men to the AIF. But new recruits also entered rifle clubs—some because they could not join up for various reasons but wanted to be seen to be doing something useful; others no doubt in the hope of avoiding service. In NSW, for example:
On June 30, 1914 there were only 305 clubs, with a membership of 14,000; on January 1 1915, there were 321 clubs with a membership of 15,430; and the latest figures [May 1915] show that there are now 390 clubs with a membership of 22,000, and more are being formed every week.560
The most overt military use of rifle club men during the war came when the Australian Naval & Military Expeditionary Force (AN&MEF) was mobilised to garrison strategic Thursday Island north of Queensland and later, to land in New Guinea and Rabaul to seize German protectorates there. The AN&MEF contained a high proportion of rifle club men, many of them members of, or assigned to, the north Queensland Kennedy Regiment, which was the core unit of the Force:
On 4th August, 1914, the Kennedy Regiment, which consisted of Companies at Charters Towers, Townsville, and Cairns, was ordered to mobilize and proceed to its war station at the Northern gateway of Australia. The Regiment required 386 men to raise it to war strength, sixteen Rifle Clubs being instructed to provide this number between them. These Clubs at once sent forward 474 medically fit members. The required 386 were selected from this number, and embarked with this Regiment. The Irvinebank Club from an active strength of 115 sent 90 members; the Herberton Club with an effective strength of 44 sent 41, the remainder of the 16 Clubs referred to sending the balance of 255 men required. 561
Not all the excitement, however, was happening overseas. Some rifle clubs did see some ‘action’ on the home front, just not perhaps as they might have imagined. For example Broome, isolated in the far north-west of Western Australia with a population of only 1,200 ‘Europeans’, was the home of the pearl fishing industry. During the season, it often saw the population of Japanese and ‘koepangers’ (Javanese and Timorese pearlers) swell to several thousand. Rivalry and mistrust between the two groups finally exploded with a riot by about 400 Japanese against the
560 E.J. Hill, ‘The Rifle Club Movement in Australia’, Lone Hand, New Series Vol.3, No.6, May 1915, p. 356. 561 A.T. Jackson, Southern Queensland Rifle Association Jubilee, 1877-1927: a brief History of the Association during the past Fifty Years, p. 68. 10
‘koepangers’ in December 1914.562 Rifle club men, including some of those who had been mobilised as wireless guards when World War One broke out, were immediately called out to help the Police to bring the trouble under control. This they managed to do, remaining on duty for some time afterwards, with up to 30 being sworn in by the police as Special Constables.563
More famously, a ‘war’ at Broken Hill saw the involvement of rifle club men. On 1 January, 1915, a picnic train with 1,200 men, women and children on board, left Broken Hill for Silverton. The 25 kilometre journey was interrupted three kilometres into the journey by rifle fire when two men, described as Turks, opened fire on the train, under a Turkish flag, from a culvert near the railway line. Four men and women were killed. Another seven men, women and children were wounded, some seriously. Armed with a Snider and a Martini-Henry, the ‘Turks’ (later identified as two Afghans from north-west India) then retreated under police pursuit. Shooting another man on the way, they occupied a position on a nearby hilltop, among large rocks. 564 The pair held off a group of present and former rifle club men, police and Citizen Force soldiers for two hours before being overrun. One was killed, the other died of wounds in hospital. Letters were found indicating that one of the men had recently returned from Turkey where he had been accepted as a soldier. The men were buried in unmarked graves and that night a crowd burned down the Broken Hill German Club and had to be dispersed peacefully by the same forces which had killed the ‘Turks’, again including rifle club men. It was the only occasion when rifle club men were called out to ‘defend Australia’ in World War One.565
As noted, during the war some members of rifle clubs had been allocated as cable or wireless station guards; by March 1916, 216 had been mobilised for active service in the 1st Military District (Queensland) and a further 25 in the 6th Military District (Tasmania); others at at strategic points like
562 West Australian, 14 December 1914, p. 8. 563 ibid. 564 Argus, 2 January 1915, p. 9. 565 Argus, 4 January 1915, p. 6. 11
Darwin.566 A number of Darwin’s Defence Rifle Club men were employees of the British Australian Telegraph and Overland Telegraph companies (BAT & OT). The BAT men (called submarine ‘lightning jerkers’) often competed with the OT men (‘the overlanders’). That these employees were members of the defence rifle club underscored the strategic importance of the submarine telegraph cable which came ashore at Darwin from Singapore via Jakarta—opened in 1871—and proceeded to Adelaide and beyond through the centre of Australia.
The strategic importance of these Darwin cables were to be reinforced by the visit in November 1911, of Commander Samuel Augustus Pethebridge, Australia’s Secretary for Defence, as he transited Darwin en route for Melbourne as he returned from the Imperial Conference in London. Discussions at the Imperial Conference had included Australian defence measures including the protection and safeguarding of submarine cables to Empire communications in time of war. Pethebridge was instructed, while in Darwin, to set up a defence rifle club under the new arrangements pertaining in Australia. He moved quickly to do so, promising free rifles, ammunition and uniforms to those interested, along with an instructor.567
The Darwin Rifle Club and Cable Guard came into being the following year, consuming the old Port Darwin Rifle Club into its ranks. A sergeant instructor for the Darwin Rifle Club and Cable Guard duly arrived in October 1912 and a civil servant and later Sheriff and Chief Clerk of Darwin, Robert James Lewis, became club president. A lieutenant with the Militia 26th Signals Company (Engineers), Lewis was given the honorary rank of captain as he assumed the command of the rifle club and cable guard. When war broke out in 1914, men of the Darwin Rifle Club and Cable Guard were mobilised to guard the landing point of the strategic telegraphic submarine cable. Subsequently, however, many of the club members enlisted in the AIF, including Captain Lewis.568
566 Commonwealth Parliamentary Papers, 1915, Report on the State Rifle Associations, District Rifle Club Unions, and Rifle Clubs for the year ended 30 June 1915, Appendix A, p.8. 567 Northern Territory Times and Gazette, 3 November 1911, p. 2. 568 Northern Territory Times and Gazette, 27 March 1913, p. 2 and Northern Territory Times and Gazette, 29 April 1915, p. 16. 12
Elsewhere, rifle club membership continued to climb, mostly in response to patriotic appeals such as one to local men in 1915 by the Roseville Club of NSW, calling upon them to join the rifle club:
Men, be efficient…Quit indecision and lethargy. Join this semi military organisation, which indefatigably drills and shoots, in a picturesque locality, and under attractive circumstances. Do not be lulled to sleep by that peace which as yet blesses Australia. Join the rifle club, which is, for most of us, the only possible way in which we business men can demonstrate our wish to get training. By such smaller sacrifices we may pay real though humble tribute to that illustrious army of millions which is gathering in Great Britain. Noble sport! Excellent physical training! Conscientious effort! It anticipates the question – “I have no time. I want to garden, go pleasuring, read, fish, play tennis, see the girl. Will the club interfere with this?” And answers simply – “Yes, a little. But 1914-15—is this playtime?” 569
By mid 1916, rifle club membership had reached a staggering 101,000 and then gradually declined to 92,000 by mid-1918 and further to 86,144 by the end of 1918. In addition, from the outbreak of the war until 31 March 1917, 24,735 members of rifle clubs enlisted for service abroad with the AIF. Around 28,000 had enlisted by the end of the war.570
While the rapid increases in rifle club membership in the period are remarkable, what is less obvious is why men joined in such numbers. Patriotic appeals to join a rifle club are one thing, but who responded and why, if indeed this was the major motivation. Certainly the rifle club was the quasi-military option to demonstrate that one was ‘doing his bit’; Militia units by 1916 were just rumps, acting primarily as recruiting depots for AIF reinforcements. Many men who were disqualified from enlisting for reasons of medical conditions or protected occupations could demonstrate that they could still train to protect ‘hearth and home’. As a result, rifle club numbers as well as members of those clubs jumped. For example, numbers of rifle clubs around
569 Advertiser, 11 February 1915, p. 8. 570 Year Book Australia, No.11, Section 28, Defence, Australian Bureau of Statistics Canberra, 1918, p. 1020 and Year Book Australia, No.12, Section 28, Defence, Australian Bureau of Statistics Canberra, 1919, pp. 1004-5. The comparatively small numbers of enlistees compared to overall numbers in the movement was to be a source of criticism after the war. 13
Australia jumped from 1,142 to 1,580 by March 1916, while memberships rose from 48,226 to 102, 529 (by this time, only 11,576 rifle club men had enlisted to serve overseas). 571
The report of the Director of Rifle Associations and Clubs to Parliament in 1916 offers little explanation for this phenomenon. While this is a supposition to be explored outside of this thesis, rifle clubs may well have been the refuge of equal numbers of men who simply did not wish to enlist, who adopted a ‘wait and see’ attitude or who recognised that as a ‘reservist’, they could not be forced to serve overseas. A telling comment appeared in a Melbourne newspaper in July 1915 which may hint in this direction. A column devoted to how Melbourne metropolitan rifle clubs, such as Kew, City of Melbourne, Malvern and Hawthorn clubs, were being placed ‘on a war footing’, and members induced to undertake drill stated the objects to be ‘to encourage men of military age and fitness to join clubs with the view of getting the training necessary to qualify them for effective work at the moment when the call of duty induces them to offer their services (emphasis added).’ 572 It could be said that by 1918 those that wished to enlist had done so, indicated by the decline in numbers or it may have been that the need to get into a rifle club for any of the reasons given above had diminished. It could simply have been that the numbers of men who could join a rifle club by 1918 had reached its limit, after the fit enlistees had left for the front.573 And it could well have been that the numbers also hid much ‘dead wood’, a fact referred to in the reports to Parliament by the Director of Rifle Associations and Clubs, namely that ‘under the Regulations, it is not permissible in time of war for members to resign or to be struck off for non-efficiency’.574
During the war years rifle clubs became places for rifle instruction, certainly, but their most valuable contribution to the war effort, other than as a source of recruits themselves, was as
571 Commonwealth Parliamentary Papers, 1915, Report on the State Rifle Associations, District Rifle Club Unions, and Rifle Clubs for the year ended 30 June 1915, Appendix A, p.8. 572 ‘Rifle Shooting’, Leader, 31 July 1915, p. 22. 573 The Hamilton Rifle Club in Victoria saw its member numbers rise from 68 to 164 in the year to end of July 1916, but only 21 members had actually enlisted in the same period. ‘Rifle Shooting’, Leader, 31 July 1915, p. 22. 574 Commonwealth Parliamentary Papers, 1915, Report on the State Rifle Associations, District Rifle Club Unions, and Rifle Clubs for the year ended 30 June 1915, p. 389. 14
recruiting agents and promoters of subscriptions to patriotic funds, such as the Lord Mayor’s patriotic fund in Sydney. Some riflemen, like Captain Herbert Dakin (secretary of the NRA of NSW) and Victoria’s Philip Fargher (Secretary of the VRA), were already Area Officers under the Universal Training Scheme, and acted as recruiters.575 Dakin, for one, staunchly supported conscription. In comments to the NRA of NSW in early 1916, he said:
Many labourers employed at the Lithgow Small Arms Factory are posing as skilled munition workers to provide themselves with a reason for not enlisting…there was a strong feeling in the district that these men might well go to the front…responsible people were agreed that the only way to reach men of this description was by compulsory enlistment.576
Two major recruiting drives during the war were intimately associated with rifle clubs. The first was the series of marches originating in country towns. The first of these began in Gilgandra, NSW, with 35 men and ended in Sydney with 230; it was led and initiated by the captain of the Gilgandra Rifle Club.577 This so-called ‘Coo-ees March’, was quickly emulated by other centres around NSW and Queensland, and rifle club men were often to the fore. The second effort was the push in 1916 to recruit men into the so-called ‘Sportsmen’s Thousand—to show the enemy what Australian sporting men can do’, which again appealed to rifle club men. Using the exhortation of ‘join together, train together, embark together, fight together’, these recruiting campaigns were used as a propaganda vehicle to encourage wider enlistment. 578
575 It is curious that they appear to be the only rifle club men to be so appointed, and that both were prominent members of the NDL in their respective States. 576 T. Griffiths, Lithgow’s Small Arms Factory and its People, Vol.1, 1907 to 1950, Toptech Engineering, Terry Hills, 2006, p. 147. 577 J. Meredith, The Coo-ee march: Gilgandra - Sydney, 1915, Macquarie, Dubbo, 1981, p. 11. 578 World War One Australian Recruiting Poster, example at AWM ART V00026. This poster, published by the State Parliamentary Recruiting Committee, depicts Lieutenant Albert Jacka, VC, as a role model for a huge campaign to enlist sportsmen into the Australian Imperial Force in 1917. Jacka achieved instant fame back home when he became the first Australian to win the Victoria Cross during the First World War. It was said that one of the reasons he was such a good soldier, and had such a fighting attitude, was that he had been a boxer before the war. The campaign to enlist sportsmen was fuelled by a strong belief that by playing sport young men developed specific skills and qualities that could be used on the battlefield. http://www.awm.gov.au/collection/ARTV00026/ 15
The best known of these units was the ‘Carmichael Thousand’ (the 36th Battalion, AIF), named after Ambrose Campbell Carmichael, a NSW Parliamentary MLA: ‘Meetings were addressed in city and country by NRA executives and club officials. Clubs held street parades to recruiting centres. It was estimated that to the ‘Carmichael Thousand, approximately 600 volunteers were enlisted from Rifle Clubs’.579 Carmichael himself was no stay-at-home—he enlisted with his unit, was wounded in action, and won a Military Cross in France. On returning in 1918 he raised another ‘Thousand’ and led them to France as well, but too late to participate in any major fighting.580 It is not known how many riflemen joined Carmichael’s second unit.
The raising of the ‘Carmichael Thousand’ in 1915 and again in 1918 needs to be placed in some context. Not just rifle club men but sportsmen of all types were appealed to in these campaigns. Indeed many rifle club men would also have been involved in other sports as well. The enlistment slogan was a ‘marketing exercise’ to encourage recruitment and was not an exercise to allow rifle reserve units (i.e., rifle clubs), to fight as single units. A particular rifle club did not fight together as a single platoon for example. While most of the rifle club men enlisted from the Western Districts of NSW, it could be said that they were responding to Carmichael’s personal appeal rather than to the general recruiting drive. In joining in local packets, they were in this regard no different from thousands of other men who had joined up through their place of work or other sporting or civic clubs.
While these few units had an unusually high number of rifle club men in their ranks, usually rifle club men were enlisted on the same basis as anyone else. Within units individual rifle club men were sometimes recognised as potential sniper material, and employed accordingly. Private Billy Sing, perhaps the best known of Australia’s World War One snipers, had at one time been a member of the Proserpine rifle club in Queensland, but it was supposedly his experience as a
579 C.H. Cromack, The History of the National Rifle Association of New South Wales, 1860-1956, p. 52. 580 B. Nairn, 'Carmichael, Ambrose Campbell (1866–1953)', Australian Dictionary of Biography, National Centre of Biography, Australian National University, http://adb.anu.edu.au/biography/carmichael-ambrose-campbell- 5506/text9369, accessed 3 December 2012. 16
kangaroo hunter that gave him the edge when firing at fleeting targets at distance rather than any skills learned on the rifle club firing mounds.581 One anecdote from Gallipoli however, illustrates the tactical usefulness of former rifle club men as snipers; in this case related by the commander of the 7th Battalion there, Lieutenant-Colonel Harold Edward (‘Pompey’) Elliot:
The following incident which occurred about the end of June, 1915, may be taken as an illustration of the great keenness which animated our snipers and observers on Gallipoli, and also of the great value which attaches to the trained and picked riflemen in position warfare such as then prevailed….many casualties occurred at the hands of Turkish riflemen who were firing …from the left rear of Steele’s [Steele’s Post]. To cope with this nuisance, a sniper’s post was constructed one night facing the danger zone and carefully camouflaged. Amongst the permanent garrison told off for its occupation were Carne, a Bendigo ex-King’s prizeman; Young, formerly the crack shot of the St. Arnaud Rifle Club; and Fisher, another well known militia shot.582
They were supplied with field glasses, telescopes, verniers, telescopic and peep sights, and all the other gadgets favoured by the target rifle shot, and speedily proved their value by gaining complete mastery over their opponents…583
How many former rifle club men became casualties in World War One will never be known. Some States like NSW and Queensland kept reasonably accurate records – these noted nearly 1,200 who died on active service, roughly about 10 percent of enlistees from rifle clubs from those States. An extrapolation would give an estimate of 2,500-4,500 who died in World War One, plus thousands of others who would have suffered wounds or illness resulting from their service. The records held by clubs are also patchy, but some club examples will give an idea. The Melbourne Rifle
581 J.M. O'Connor, Shooting awards and prize medals to Australian Military Forces 1860-2000, p. 67 and A.T. Jackson, Southern Queensland Rifle Association Jubilee, 1877-1927: a brief History of the Association during the past Fifty Years, p. 75. 582 Percival Reuben Carne and Ernest Sydney Fisher from Bendigo, and Harold Henry Young from St. Arnaud, Victoria. Both Young and Fisher were wounded twice, each at Gallipoli and France; Fisher served with the 5th Australian Infantry Regiment before the war. All three returned to Australia. 583 ‘they sniped a Turkish officer who had been a regular visitor to the Turk trenches’; recorded in the 7th Battalion diary. C.E.W. Bean in his Volume II of the official History of Australia in WWI [World War One] says that Mustapha Kemal, Commanding the Turkish 19th Division, had been planning an attack on the Australian lines at Russell Top with the 18th Regiment commanded by a highly regarded officer; it was this officer who was sniped and the attack went badly. Time and date fixed his identity, and while we may deplore the loss of a very gallant foe thus obscurely and untimely slain, we may nevertheless congratulate ourselves upon the results which flowed from the untiring watchfulness and deadly skill of our own men, which saved us from a possible disaster at the hands of the enemy.’ H.E. Elliott, ‘Sniper’s Bullet Broke Turkish Plans’, The Victorian Bullseye, February 1992, p. 6. 17
Club had 99 ‘active’ members in 1914. By 1919, 39 had volunteered for active service, 29 were accepted and of these, eight did not return. 584 In country NSW, the Katoomba Rifle Club recorded in July 1918 that it had 67 members. By then five members had been killed in action, one had died of wounds and one of disease, and six had been invalided home; 13 were still at the front with another two members en route, while two were on home service. Altogether about a third of the membership had enlisted.585
Alternately, the Cottesloe-Claremont Rifle Club in WA had 188 men on their roll in June 1915 (not all active). By the end of 1918 they had 110. A total of 91 men had enlisted, and seven did not return while many others were casualties. The club’s annual report of 1918 said: ‘During the year we have had the great pleasure of welcoming back from the Front several others of our members [the report listed six men]. We all sincerely trust that none of these fellows will suffer any permanent ill- effects from the injuries or sickness by reason of which they were invalided home, or discharged.’586 In Tasmania’s Old Launcestorian Rifle Club, by the end of 1914, 53 men had joined the club, of which 19 had joined the ‘expeditionary force’, two were commissioned, and four were later noted to have been killed or died on active service.587 In South Australia, the Cyclists Rifle Club enlisted 28 members during the Great War; six were killed and ten returned to the club.588 The Palace Emporium Rifle Club, in Sydney, had 262 men pass through the rolls during the war. Of these, 75 enlisted and ten did not survive the war. This rifle club was typical of clubs established around a work place, and the losses would have been keenly felt.589
584 Melbourne Rifle Club: Thirtieth Annual Report for the Year 1914, Thomas Urquhart & Co., Melbourne, 1915, p. 8, and Melbourne Rifle Club: Thirty-Fifth Annual Report for the Year 1919, Thomas Urquhart & Co., Melbourne, 1920, p. 5. 585 C. Roberts, From Cascade to Wentworth Creek: a History of Katoomba Rifle Club1893-1988, p. 37. 586 Cottelsoe - Claremont Rifle Club Reserve No. 164: Annual Report for year ending 30 June 1918, Perth, W.A., 1918, pp. 9-18. 587 ‘Old Launcestonian Rifle Club - Register of Members 1 January 1914 - 30 September 1915’, Archives Offices of Tasmania, NS523/1/2. 588 A.M. Ramsey, ‘Early History of the Cyclists’ Rifle Club’, Bullseye, No.64, August 1994, p. 17. 589 The Palace Emporium Rifle Club - Fifth Annual Report 1918-1919, np, Sydney, 1919, npn. 18
In addition the rifle club rank and file, over 20 former delegates or office holders in the CCRAA served during the war. Several received decorations and awards, rising to senior ranks. 590 Two were killed in action. Major Leslie Barnard Welch took the Western Australian 11th Battalion to Gallipoli and then to the Western Front, where he was killed by enemy artillery fire at Pozières, France, in 1916. Probably the most prominent of the delegates to the CCRAA who became a casualty during the war was Lieutenant-Colonel William Holmes. He had commanded the AN&MEF which captured Rabaul in German New Guinea. In early 1915 Holmes was given command of the 5th Brigade and saw service in Gallipoli and France including at the battles of Pozières and Flers. In 1917 he was promoted to Major-General and commanded the 4th Division at Bullecourt and
591 Messines. Holmes died of wounds from artillery fire in July 1917.
Back in Australia, rifle club activities continued but many clubs suspended matches altogether while others acted as fund raisers for the war effort. 592 When modern service rifles were withdrawn for service in the AIF, the clubs had few of these rifles anyway:
The difficulty of obtaining rifles for such a large body of men as that now enrolled in the ranks of rifle clubs has not yet been fully overcome. All the rifles that can be turned out at our small arms factory are required for the Expeditionary Forces; but this has not deterred men from joining the clubs. Any old kind of rifle does to teach a man how the weapon is to be handled,
590 Some examples include Lieutenant-Colonel Bernard James Newmarch, VD, who had been a delegate to the 1898 Federal Council, was promoted to colonel, awarded the CMG, CBE, and was mentioned in dispatches. Delegate to the Federal Council in 1896, Major J.J. Byron, was by 1917 in command of a British artillery group on the Western Front and was then appointed second-in-command of the Dunsterforce Caucasus Military Mission. His war honours included the DSO and the Légion d'honneur, as well as several mentions in dispatches – see R.P. Serle, 'Byron, John Joseph (1863 - 1935)', Australian Dictionary of Biography, Vol.7, Melbourne University Press, 1979, pp. 519-20. Major F. B. Heritage, for distinguished service in France, was awarded the Croix de Guerre – see C.H. Finlay, 'Heritage, Francis Bede (1877 - 1934)', Australian Dictionary of Biography, Vol. 9, Melbourne University Press, 1983, pp. 269-270. 591 B.H. Travers, 'Holmes, William (1862 - 1917)', Australian Dictionary of Biography, Vol. 9, Melbourne University Press, 1983, pp. 349-351. 592 Examples include large scale activities, such as ‘Riflemen’s Patriotic Carnivals’, such as the one held in 1915 by the NRA of NSW in support of the Belgium Relief Fund, which raised £600 after 5000 riflemen and between 12 and 15,000 people attended. Report of the National Rifle Association of New South Wales, Sydney, 1915, F. Clark Printing House, Sydney, 1916, pp. 52-53. Another example, at a club level, was of the Palace Emporium Rifle Club in Sydney in 1918 which was one of many clubs selling tickets for an Art Union raffle in support of the Lord Mayor’s Fund assisting the families of thousands of soldiers. Palace Emporium Rifle Club: 5th Annual Report 1918-19, np, Sydney, 1919, npn. 19
and more than one club drills with rifles of out-of-date pattern, or with miniature rifles, until as such time as the club can be supplied with the latest thing in lethal weapons.593
Overall, while the rifle clubs were in some ways more active in terms of members than at the peak of the Boer War, the actual rifle club movement as such did not advance much in terms of organisation, development or activities during World War One, sidelined as it was by both the creation of the AIF and the war being fought away from Australia, from fulfilling its home defence role. With many of its leadership away on active service or in other ways engaged with the war effort, the CCRAA did not meet during the war at all. Even the Executive Committee only held one formal meeting between 1915 and 1918. Otherwise the rifle club movement marked time, waiting for the war to end, perhaps assuming that it would then be a return to business as usual. But as it was to find out, the Great War had changed everything, including the standing of the rifle club movement within Australia’s defence paradigm.
This chapter has shown how the rifle clubs were ‘militarised’, like the rest of Australian society, in the lead-up to World War One. Under strict military control, rifle clubs were seen as military reserves. However, when war came the rifle clubs were regarded as being of little value when it came to the raising of an Expeditionary Force. Rifle clubs—regarded by the military as ineffective as reservists let alone as military units—and rifle club men were hardly utilised as trainers by the military, who did not regard them as effective at shooting under service conditions. While numbers in rifle clubs in Australia grew to the size of an army itself by 1917, the movement overall essentially failed to provide the numbers of active reserves for the AIF that perhaps had been envisaged; and individual marksmen did little to change the course of battles or campaigns. By the end of the war in 1918, the rifle club movement was seen, at least by the veteran military men, as an expensive luxury.
593 E.J. Hill, ‘The Rifle Club Movement in Australia’, p. 356. 20
Chapter 8
Two steps back, one step forward 1919-1928
This chapter relates the fortunes of the rifle club movement from the end of World War One to the eve of the Great Depression. The period was to see many challenges to the viability of the rifle club movement beginning with an attack by the most senior military officers who questioned the contribution of the rifle to the ultimate outcome of the war and the need for the relationship with the military to continue. In fact the military officers called for the disbandment of the rifle club movement altogether. Additionally politicians also criticised the war effort of the rifle club men. While the movement survived these attacks they found themselves placed under the Minister for Defence and not the Army. Tight economic circumstances in the post-war period also restricted the resurgence of the rifle club movement in the period to 1928 in an environment of Defence restructuring and a further widening of the formal ties between the movement and the military. The movement, however, also experienced some high points including the first visit of a team from Britain since 1907 and rifle matches against the visiting US pacific Fleet in 1925; as well some controversy as women began to appear on the big-bore shooting scene for the first time, challenging the traditional male dominance in some clubs.
On 1 May 1919, the Commonwealth Council of Rifle Associations of Australia (CCRAA) Executive Committee met in Melbourne for the first time since early 1915. A full Council meeting, the likes of which had not been held since 2 October 1913, was now planned for February 1920.594 During the war years, with key executives on active service, only correspondence matters had been dealt with. The war might be over, but the State rifle associations were in some disarray, with many of their pre-war members still overseas awaiting repatriation to Australia from Europe and other war
594 Report of the Commonwealth Council of Rifle Associations of Australia for the period 1915 to 1920, Cook and Fisher, Sydney, 1920, pp. 9-18. 1
theatres. At the Melbourne meeting of May 1919, delegate numbers were also restricted thanks to the influenza regulations in force due to the world-wide pandemic.595
The Executive later reported:
…it cannot be too strongly pressed on the Government that, unless they come to the rescue and restore pre-war grants to Associations, the future of the Rifle Club Movement, which has proved of such use in war time, is doomed. It would appear to be of no use mincing matters at this stage, for unless the grants are forthcoming, the inevitable disaster is at hand, and the work of Associations of over half a century destroyed.596
The CCRAA Executive was thus focused on a return to the status quo. It could not foresee that the greatest threat was not to come from a lack of grants, but from the very generals who had commanded its riflemen at war.
An early and pressing issue for the CCRAA in the aftermath of the war was how to obtain money to allow the long-planned visit by a British team to Australia to proceed. An Australian rifle team was also being formed from AIF men in Europe to shoot at the Victory Meeting at Bisley in July 1919. Lieutenant-Colonel R. H. Beardsmore, DSO, VD, was appointed team captain of this AIF team and representative of the CCRAA.597 The NRA in the UK in turn began to organise a team to visit Australia in 1920, still unsure as to whether the trip would proceed or not. A CCRAA deputation was formed to call on the acting Minister for Defence, Senator Edward John Russell, regarding this visit and the general issue of the resumption of club shooting throughout Australia.598
595 Report of the Commonwealth Council of Rifle Associations of Australia for the period 1915 to 1920, Cook and Fisher, Sydney, 1920, p. 17. 596 Report of the Commonwealth Council of Rifle Associations of Australia for the period 1915 to 1920, Cook and Fisher, Sydney, 1920, p. 18. 597 Beardsmore was in situ - after the cessation of hostilities, he was a staff officer for demobilization at Australian depots in the United Kingdom. He was a recognised rifle shot in his own right, and a pre-war member of the NRA of NSW Council. 598 Report of the Commonwealth Council of Rifle Associations of Australia for the period 1915 to 1920, Cook and Fisher, Sydney, 1920, p. 8. 2
At that meeting with the Minister, on 2 May 1919, which was joined by George Henry Wise, the Assistant Minister for Defence, the CCRAA deputation asked for the reinstatement of the pre-war grants in the 1919-1920 Estimates. This would allow the resumption of prize meetings from late October 1920. The riflemen claimed that rifle clubs were composed half of Militia and civilians, and there was military support for the resumption of shooting. Senator Russell was assured that all returned soldiers would be eligible to join rifle clubs and compete in prize matches, while none of the grant would go to individual members—but only for ‘ammunition, salary of secretaries and incidentals.’ Russell agreed to take their case to the Treasurer, but no grants were forthcoming for 1919. State rifle associations had to cancel planned matches at short notice, such as the VRA’s October competitions.599
Yet it was not all bad news for the rifle club movement. At the end of 1919, there were 1,383 clubs with a membership of 81,006, and in addition 128 miniature rifle clubs having a membership of 5,827. 600 It seemed that the rifle club movement was still popular, perhaps even more so than before the war began. The war had, however, destroyed any sentimentality left over among senior military officers about the rifle club movement. On 23 January 1920, a special Military Committee, responsible to the national Council of Defence, was convened in Melbourne to ‘formulate a military defence scheme for Australia in the light of the war experience and the current world view.’601 It was composed of six of the most prominent senior officers in Australia (three Permanent and three Citizen Force officers), all of whom had served in the war, and was chaired by the Minister for Defence Senator Sir George Foster Pearce.602
599 ‘Letter VRA to CCRAA, 24 September 1919, NAA A461, Item 90903. 600 Year Book Australia, No.13, Section 28 Defence, Australian Bureau of Statistics, Canberra, 1920, p. 1000. 601 Commonwealth of Australia: Department of Defence - Report on the Military Defence of Australia by a Conference of Senior Officers of the Australian Military Forces , 1920, Vol.1, Albert J. Mullett, Govt. Printer, Melbourne, 1920, p. 4. 602 The officers were: Lieutenant-Generals Sir Henry George (‘Harry’) Chauvel and Sir John Monash, and Major- Generals Sir James Whiteside McCay (a former Defence Minister), Sir Joseph John Talbot Hobbs, Sir Cyril Brudenel Bingham White and James Gordon Legge. Commonwealth of Australia: Department of Defence - Report on the Military Defence of Australia by a Conference of Senior Officers of the Australian Military Forces , 1920, Vol.1, Albert J. Mullett, Govt. Printer, Melbourne, 1920. For details on Pearce, see Connor, J., ‘Senator George Pearce as defence minister’, PhD thesis, School of Humanities and Social Sciences Australian Defence Force Academy, 2004.
3
Even though, among many other matters, the Military Committee looked closely at the value of rifle clubs to defence, it had no time to consult with the CCRAA for it was under pressure to present its report to the Council of Defence by 9 February. Three days before the deadline however, Merrett, Chairman of the VRA and member of the CCRAA Executive, met with the Military Committee to give his views on the value of the movement to defence. The Director of Rifle Associations and Clubs (DRAC), Major W. H. Osborne, VD, was also called before the committee.603 Colonel Merrett’s defence of the rifle shooting movement was reported in the Argus on 18 March 1920:
Colonel Merrett, in a spirited defence of the rifle club movement, pointed out in his report that since 1885, when the first detachments of mounted rifles and dismounted units were formed in Victoria, the organisation had rendered signal service. …The view was expressed by Colonel Merrett that if Australia were attacked it would be guerrilla warfare, as in South Africa, rather than trench warfare as in the last war. A large proportion of mounted men would, he said, be required on account of mobility, and rifle clubs would form the nucleus of such a force, and also be an organised but scattered unit of men trained to the care and use of the rifle.
Colonel Merrett contended that members of the military had not in the past been taught to shoot. Members of rifle clubs, on the other hand, regarded shooting as a pleasure and the result had been that they had invariably defeated military teams in military matches…
The main objection to the rifle club movement has been on the score of expense. Colonel Merrett, however, pointed out to the committee that the largest amount voted by Parliament for rifle clubs was £51,000 in 1914, the vote including range upkeep, salaries, votes to rifle associations, unions and clubs. Adding the sum of £60,000 for free ammunition the outside cost in one year had been £111,000 The advantages to be gained by maintaining the organisation were that the Commonwealth would have available an easily mobilised force of over 50,000 men fit for service, with their own rifles, at a cost of £2 each per annum.604
603 Commonwealth of Australia: Department of Defence - Report on the Military Defence of Australia by a Conference of Senior Officers of the Australian Military Forces, 1920, p. 4. 604 Argus, 18 March 1920, p. 5. Merrett’s full statement was later re-produced in the Report of the Commonwealth Council of Rifle Associations of Australia for the year 1935, Keating-Wood Pty. Ltd, Melbourne 1935, pp. 19-23, the first time that it had ever been published. 4
Merrett was worried, of course, that the Defence chiefs were inclined to recommend the disbandment of all rifle clubs for defence purposes. As one general officer on the committee noted:
I did not discover during my war service that men particularly distinguished themselves as marksman owing to their association with Rifle Clubs, and, in any case—good as our snipers and marksmen may have been—it is doubtful if their efforts shortened the war by one day.605
Such sentiments were met with dismay by the rifle shooting community and it was in this context that the first CCRAA Council meeting since 1913 was held in Melbourne in February 1920.606
The immediate post-war climate for the rifle club movement was, for the most part, decidedly mixed. With rifle club membership at an all-time high, and former members rapidly coming back to Australia from the war, it should have been an optimistic time. However, the CCRAA was faced with difficult finances, the spectre of disbandment of all clubs which could not be self-sustaining, and a British rifle team awaiting confirmation of a planned tour with the added niggling uncertainty that it might not be welcomed properly to Australia if it did arrive. In addition, the CCRAA itself needed to recover from the war interregnum and re-assert its authority with State associations looking for leadership.
The Minister for Defence, Pearce, joined the CCRAA meeting of February 1920 to discuss the question of grants and future of rifle clubs. Immediately the CCRAA chairman asked for funds to conduct the British rifle team tour. Pearce replied that there was no money, and until the Military Committee had reported on the future of the rifle movement he could make no commitment. Colonel Merrett complained that although he had seen the Military Committee, he did so as the chairman of the VRA, and that no notes were taken of his views. The Minister suggested the Council send in a written position directly to the Council of Defence. The NSW representative
605 Defence Department: Rifle Clubs - Views of Major-General J.J.T. Hobbs, Albert J. Mullett, Govt. Printer, Melbourne, 1920, p. 1. 606 One new delegate was James Freeman Ryle from Western Australia. Captain of the Perth Club and president of the Metropolitan District Union, Ryle had become well-known because he had headed the so-called ‘Vigilance Committee’ in 1913 which had attacked Senator Pearce for his perceived lack of support for the riflemen of Western Australia. The West Australian, 31 May 1913, p. 6. 5
wanted that State also to have the opportunity to speak to the Military Committee. Impossible, said the Minister, the Military Committee had already dispersed.607 Again the Council requested £500 for the visit of the British team and a further £300 for travel expenses, but was asked to submit a written request. This the Council did, with a letter that very day, adding a further request for free ammunition for the State associations to hold their matches with the British team. Later that afternoon, a reply was received in the affirmative to the requests for money, ‘without prejudice to the future policy of the Government in respect to financial assistance to Rifle Clubs.’608 The Council also agreed to send a paper to the Council of Defence through Pearce setting out their case as to why rifle clubs should be supported in any new Defence scheme.609
Meanwhile the Council of Defence had met and discussed the findings of the Military Committee. As far as the military chiefs were concerned, they wanted no more to do with rifle club movement. The main issue was money. Already a grant of £50,000 for 1921 was to be placed on the Estimates for rifle clubs. While arguing strongly that the rifle club movement had brought little return from the investment made in it by Government and Defence over many years (and especially during World War One), the Defence chiefs were mostly concerned about how to pay for the future defence structure they felt was needed for Australia. As one of their members, Major-General J. Talbot Hobbs, put it:
I am decidedly against any considerable sum of public money being spent on what is little more than a national sport and pastime, and is only regarded as such by a very large number of rifle clubs. I fear that any money allotted to rifle clubs would be at the expense of the fighting efficiency of the Citizen Forces.610
In its final report the Military Committee devoted just one paragraph to rifle clubs:
607 Report of the Commonwealth Council of Rifle Associations of Australia for the period 1915 to 1920, Cook and Fisher, Sydney, 1920, p. 11. 608 Report of the Commonwealth Council of Rifle Associations of Australia for the period 1915 to 1920, p. 11. 609 Mercury, 5 March 1920, p. 8. 610 Defence Department: Rifle Clubs - Views of Major-General J.J.T. Hobbs, Albert J. Mullett, Govt. Printer, Melbourne, 1920, p. 1. 6
The circumstances in which rifle clubs formed part of the Reserve Forces of Australia are now changed. Having regard to modern military training requirements, and the numbers of trained personnel available in emergency, the Conference is of opinion that the maintenance of rifle clubs as a Reserve is no longer militarily necessary. If, for other reasons, it is desired to continue to subsidize rifle clubs, the expenditure should not be carried on the Defence or Army Estimates, nor need the organization be administered by the Defence Department.611
So when a compromise was suggested, perhaps at Pearce’s suggestion, that the administration of rifle clubs be placed with the Civil Branch of the Defence Department, there was no objection, at least publicly. The generals had won their case.
The initial views of the Military Committee, however, as they became known, caused an urgent meeting of the CCRAA Executive to be called in Melbourne for 26 August 1920, especially when it heard that the Government was about to make announcements regarding new Defence policy. Pearce requested one last representation to him by the CCRAA before Cabinet made its final decision on the future of rifle clubs. A deputation dutifully met with the Minister that same day and ‘forcibly put before him what a disastrous step it would be to sever the Rifle Club Movement from the scheme of Defence…’612 The CCRAA made the following recommendations:
1. That the control of the Rifle Club Movement in Australia should remain under the Defence Department but be transferred to the Civil Branch thereof in consequence of the lack of sympathy for, and interest in, rifle shooting, as a means of national defence, shown by the military for many years past.
2. That in addition to the proposed grant of £50,000, the ammunition presently in stock and already paid for by the [Defence] Department, be made available as formerly, otherwise the Rifle Club Movement must cease, owing to want of necessary funds to carry on. 613
To the rifle associations, a rejection of this compromise position was unthinkable. Tied as they were to the defence system by emotion, finances, tradition and sentiment, the leadership of the rifle club
611 Commonwealth of Australia – Department of Defence - Report on the Military Defence of Australia by a Conference of Senior Officers of the Australian Military Forces, 6 February 1920’, Vol.2, p. 24. 612 Report of the Commonwealth Council of Rifle Associations of Australia for the period 1915 to 1920, p. 11. 613 ibid. 7
movement could see no other future for themselves. Still strongly wedded to the view that the ethos and values of rifle shooting were both national pastime and defence asset, the leaders and membership of the movement faced what they saw as an unpalatable future and resolved to fight to retain the status quo. Nowhere was this conservatism shown up more clearly than in Merrett’s statement to the committee in 1920. 614
The CCRAA Executive was, however, forced to turn quickly to the other major pressing matter— the visit of the British rifle team. The team had already left England without even knowing where it would first land (it had barely managed to leave at all, as the NRA also faced financial constraints of its own). The committee thus fixed a timetable of state matches for the visit and informed the British team, which had reached South Africa. Another meeting of the Council was called for, and it was set for Melbourne over 12-15 November and in Adelaide on 18 November 1920. Remarkably, it was not until 10 November that the future of rifle clubs was officially confirmed in a letter to the CCRAA, just in time for their meeting.
This all-important letter from the Secretary of Defence brought much comfort to the CCRAA and all riflemen of Australia at the eleventh hour. In it, it was stated that until further notice the administration of rifle clubs would be conducted by the Defence Department’s Civil Branch; that a grant of £50,000 had been made to carry on in 1921, along with £30,000 worth of ammunition and a further grant of £15,000 for free ammunition to conduct rifle association and rifle club unions prize meetings.615 To be fully funded and as generously as it was in those difficult financial times and under the new arrangements, came as a huge relief for the CCRAA.616 Brigadier Foott, however,
614 Argus, 18 March 1920, p. 5. 615 The £15,000 worth of free ammunition amounted to 9 million rounds alone, as reported in the Register, 10 November 1920, p.9. In addition, so far that year the CCRAA had also received £500 for the visit of the British rifle team and £300 towards the travel costs for interstate teams, along with a further £200 as an ordinary grant to the Council. 616 Report of the Commonwealth Council of Rifle Associations of Australia for the period 1915 to 1920, p. 25. It seemed that the rifle club movement retained the confidence and support of some politicians at least. 8
then addressed the meeting to explain the new system of administration and the desire of the Military Board not to take part in it; formal military ties were thereby severed. 617
With its short-term viability assured, the Council turned to other issues on its table. Merrett presented a trophy, the McAlister Shield, to be shot for in the Commonwealth Match.618 Heritage proposed that service matches conform to military requirements as far as is practicable. This was agreed, and Heritage was asked to draw up conditions for the Northcote, Gordon Highlanders and Colonial Ammunition Co. Trophy service matches. As well, ‘tin hat’ targets were authorised for use in the Northcote Match in Adelaide.619 Accepting Heritage’s proposal seemed like an odd abdication by the Council after it was now free from direct military control of its affairs, but as will be seen, old habits were hard to break.
In what could be described as a distinct failure of imagination in the face of its rejection by the Defence chiefs, the CCRAA concluded its Melbourne meeting with a re-confirmation of its objectives. In an eight point statement, later to be sent to the Minister, it advocated that rifle clubs be kept as part of the defence system, including by continuing to use attestations on enlistment, using rifle club men as cable guards and training militia in exempt training areas, to train in machine guns and provide a reserve.620
The very next day, the British rifle team was entertained by the CCRAA at a dinner at Melbourne’s well-known Cafe Francais in Little Collins Street. The evening was notable, not for the hospitality gladly extended to the visitors, or because of the shooting medals handed out, but because the guests of honour were the Australian Prime Minister, Billy Hughes, and the Minister for
617 ibid. 618 David Lindsay McAlister of NSW was a member of the Australian rifle team to Bisley in 1914 under Merrett, and had been killed in action in France in 1917. 619 ‘Tin hat’ military targets were introduced by the NRA as early as 1915 to simulate service conditions - they were painted very light grey on top and a sandy colour on the lower half with only half the bull showing, hence the ‘tin hat’. 620 Report of the Commonwealth Council of Rifle Associations of Australia for the period 1915 to 1920, p. 27. 9
Defence, Senator Pearce. The presence of the Prime Minister underlined the influence that the rifle club movement still held with politicians, as well as the importance placed upon this visit by the British team, the first since 1907.621 Hughes made a short friendly speech to the British team, where he emphasised the value of training in the use of the rifle as an asset of national defence:
It would be a splendid thing for Australia if greater numbers of citizens learned the use of the rifle...and gave his assurance that the Australian Government regarded the visit of the British team as of the first importance.622
The Minister for Defence, Senator Pearce, then spoke. In the wake of the Military Committee findings the previous March, the senior executives of the CCRAA, NRA of NSW and VRA executives present would have found no comfort in the Senator’s speech. Pearce took direct aim and fired:
There is one point about which I must be candid…I was not satisfied with the numbers of men from the rifle clubs when the war came. I was not satisfied that it showed that any country could rely on any rifle movement for anything like an adequate defence. It has been stated that 28,000 riflemen volunteered with the A.I.F, in which were some 400,000 men, but 28,000 out of a total of 85,000 riflemen is not a proportion about which there was a great deal to boast of. Owing to the age limit as well the rifle club was not a defence on which Australia could rely in war. The most it could ever be was an adjunct of defence.623
Senator Pearce had basically called into question their commitment to the war effort. In the post- war period, this was stern stuff indeed, especially as many of the officers present had served throughout the war themselves. Pearce’s speech had been blunt. In this environment, it was not clear that the rifle club movement would ever recover its former strength, influence and reach.
621 It is difficult to judge whether this influence was purely sentimental and traditional, including as a result of the number of politicians with Volunteer, Militia or rifle club ties, or based on more practical political assessments such as the number of riflemen and clubs in electorates where their votes could be important. 622 Report of the Commonwealth Council of Rifle Associations of Australia for the period 1915 to 1920, pp. 68-9. 623 ibid. On the face of it, most riflemen were unfit for active duty, either because of age, medical reasons, or restricted occupations, but there is no detailed evidence that this was so, perhaps leaving observers like Pearce unconvinced that the real reasons for low numbers of enlistment into the AIF perhaps lay elsewhere. 10
On 18 November 1920 the CCRAA Council meeting resumed in Adelaide.624 This sent another letter to Pearce, containing further recommendations for the future administration of the rifle clubs. Picking up from where it had left off after its previous eight-point recommendations, the letter continued on in a similar vein. Its recommendations in effect meant the continuation of full government support for the rifle club movement to restore that enjoyed before the war. It played the emotional card, stating that rifle clubs were ‘a connecting link to military units’ and so helped maintain ‘national spirit of loyalty and patriotism’. Most important, it advocated that the constitutions of the CCRAA and State rifle associations remain unchanged.625
The letter sent by the Adelaide meeting to Pearce was a detailed, matter of fact, even hubristic affirmation that the CCRAA was in full control; it seemed that Pearce’s speech had not shaken the riflemen’s belief in themselves or the purpose of the movement. Under the leadership of the CCRAA, the movement had managed a strong comeback in the face of disbandment. Although military ties had been formally severed, Defence ties had not and the movement was rewarded with a return to the status quo with regard to grants and capitation. In large part this was due to the sheer number of men around Australia who had been or still were, members of rifle clubs. This included many influential individuals at all levels of society. Their actual and sentimental attachments to rifle shooting became an influencing factor in reaching a compromise in the face of the recommendations of the Military Committee of 1920 to disband rifle clubs.
Yet the decision to move administration of rifle clubs to the civil arm of defence was perhaps an opportunity missed for the rifle club movement. There was certainly a chance for the CCRAA to accept that rifle shooting in clubs was essentially a target shooting past-time for civilians and citizen soldiers alike, and not the valuable adjunct to defence that its leaders maintained. The social and military objectives of the system of universal military training from 1910 had been smashed by the
624 Report of the Commonwealth Council of Rifle Associations of Australia for the period 1915 to 1920, p. 27. 625 Report of the Commonwealth Council of Rifle Associations of Australia for the period 1915 to 1920, pp. 30-32.
11
grim realities of the Great War. Rifle Club men had played their part, to a point, but had not been called upon to defend Australia. In the post-war period, the general antipathy to most things military and aversion to war among the public affected so badly by the casualties and grief, also extended to the rifle club movement. With the military connection all but severed, and money tight, rifle shooting was suddenly not as important in the public eye as it once seemed to be. Nonetheless, the leaders of the movement were upbeat. The rifle club movement had faced challenges before and had overcome them. Its leaders, driven first and foremost by their great love of the sport and a firm belief in its national purpose, were determined to return the movement to its former strength.626
The new decade dawned, therefore, with equal amounts of great optimism and pessimism. At the CCRAA meeting of 1921, held in Sydney, there was a changing of the guard on the Council, the most important being the retirement of the stalwart and long-serving Chairman, Brigadier G.H. Dean, in favour of Colonel C.E. Merrett, VD, from Victoria. Press reports of that meeting are remarkable for their sparseness, perhaps reflecting the lack of activity overall. The Council expressed the hope that an Australian team might go to Bisley in 1923 and optimistically decided to ask the Commonwealth for a grant of £1500 in 1922 and 1923 in order to construct an Australian ‘hut’ at Bisley.627
Yet limited finances were being felt in other areas. All State rifle associations were suffering from falling numbers and the costs of travel were becoming difficult for interstate teams and individual riflemen both. The proposed Australian hut at Bisley was also on the CCRAA’s agenda—Brigadier Dean had arranged while in England for architects to draw up plans but State delegates were not happy: ‘The word "hut" is a figure of speech only, as the building according to the plans submitted might more correctly be described as a mansion.’628 On the surface, the end of 1922 saw a return of
626 This was evidenced by the public statements of such leaders as Merrett and the CCRAA’s prescriptions for returning the movement to its former position as expressed in its veracious letters to the Minister for Defence. The Argus, 18 March 1920, p. 5 and Report of the Commonwealth Council of Rifle Associations of Australia for the period 1915 to 1920. 627 Western Argus, 25 October 1921, p. 34. 628 Mercury, 21 October 1922, p. 11. 12
most of the routine activities of State and regional rifle associations. Despite some uncertainty and the financial pressures, it seemed like business as usual for the Commonwealth Council.
Meanwhile, on the defence front, there had been a wholesale reorganisation of the Militia in 1921, when the Militia units adopted many of the associations and colours of the former AIF units. This, and the limited resumption of universal military training, presented new opportunities to the State rifle associations and the CCRAA to re-energise Militia rifle clubs and its relationship with the Army.629 Government subsidies returned, but they were smaller than before. In fact, most of the rifle associations had little cash left after years of inactivity. In Britain, even the NRA had to make a public appeal for funds to keep it solvent. Economic conditions continued to be difficult and, politically, cuts from the defence budget were the most palatable. In 1922 the Army was reduced to 37,000 men and annual training camps were discontinued.
In this context, by the beginning of 1922, rifle club membership was rapidly declining. From 81,000 members in 1919, rifle club membership had dropped to 60,000 by May 1922 and would fall to an all-time low of 38,253 by 1927.630 Returned veterans of the AIF, unless they had been members of rifle clubs before the war, rarely joined rifle clubs afterwards—indeed, the Government was hard pressed to induce veterans to join the newly created Militia Reserves—and later it allowed Citizen Forces Rifle Clubs to be formed with the Militia members receiving the same privileges in ammunition etc. that the civilian rifle clubs received. The new types of clubs flourished.631 A positive note was that the number of ‘efficient’ riflemen was rising even as overall numbers dropped; this increased proportional income from the capitation grants.632
629 Although the CCRAA refused to support a request for £100 prize money for the 1st Division rifle competitions - see Report of the National Rifle Association of New South Wales for 1922, Harold Murray, Sydney, 1923, p. 28. 630 Year Book Australia, No.13, Section 28 Defence, Australian Bureau of Statistics, Canberra, 1920, p. 1000; Sydney Morning Herald , 29 May 1922, p. 10; and Report of the Commonwealth Council of Rifle Associations of Australia, Keating- Wood Pty. Ltd., Melbourne, 1935, pp. 54-5. 631 Mercury 17 January 1928, p. 3. 632 ibid. 13
Throughout this period no figures are available on average ages in the rifle clubs although enrolments from a single club in August and September of 1922 were put forward as anecdotal evidence, somewhat hopefully, ‘that it is not elderly men alone who join rifle clubs.’633 Of course these figures gave no information as to what the age groups were already in the club, whether the club was urban or rural, or how the figures compared to other clubs—and the figures themselves were hardly reassuring. In addition, rifle ranges everywhere had largely been neglected during the war years except for some key ranges used extensively for military training. The military even then were only prepared to upkeep their ranges to 600 yards and maintain their own ‘tin-hat’ targets. Rifle range rents had stayed the same or increased, but rifle club incomes mostly declined in proportion with falling membership.
Further indications of resource problems were that stocks of Mk.V and Mk.VI ammunition were becoming obsolete while rifle clubs had few of the .303 SMLE rifles being issued to the Militia— which used Mk.VII ammunition unsuitable for the single shot ‘Long’ Martini-Enfield and other types of long .303 rifles being used in rifle clubs. At the same time, the Lithgow Small Arms Factory was struggling even to supply the Militia. In fact, rifle production fell dramatically after June 1922 as Lithgow was ‘ordered to operate on a ‘nucleus’ basis—just ticking over, keeping the skills polished and the rust at bay.’634 Inevitably, with production of the ‘long’ rifles and barrels ended, continued use of those rifles would be unsustainable.
Meanwhile, despite severed official ties to the Army, military men still played prominent roles within rifle associations. State commandants appointed their own men to rifle association councils even though the 1921 ruling had moved administration to the civil arm of defence. In fact the Army had it both ways. It kept a tight fist around the operations of the rifle association councils through such nominees while avoiding the administration costs associated with rifle range upkeep, train
633 Mercury, 8 February 1923, p. 11. ‘Out of 100 enrolment forms received in a rifle club's office the results were as follows:- Date of Birth and number: 1902-1906–36; 1892-1901-31; 1882-1891-21; 1872-1881-10; 1862-1871-2; Total- 100.’ 634 T. Griffiths, Lithgow’s Small Arms Factory and its People, Vol.1, p.199. See also the Cairns Post, 9 February 1923, p. 8. 14
travel and ammunition.635 In NSW, Western Australia and Victoria, Citizen Force Rifle Associations (CFRAs) were established with their own match fixtures and prize money—some assisted by the State rifle associations. However, the State rifle associations usually had two or three of their own council members on those of the CFRAs, ensuring cooperation and the continued engagement with the Army. Initial enthusiasm for the new CFRAs was to wilt in the face of continuing economic restrictions and tight purse-strings.
By the time of the meeting of the CCRAA in Melbourne in early March 1923, many of these emerging challenges were becoming more evident; some were pressing. Delegates at this meeting discussed among routine matters the lack of uniformity of targets, encouragement of militia trainees in rifle shooting, and the problem of the availability of barrels from Lithgow.636 An Australian rifle team had not fired at Bisley for more than ten years and this council meeting confirmed the intention to send a team in 1924. Osborne, who had retired from the position of DRAC with an MBE, was nominated as permanent secretary of the CCRAA later in the year with an annual service fee of £100. 637
The 1924 summer Olympics, as in 1908, would be held in the same year that the Australian rifle team would be in Bisley. Scheduled for Paris in June, the Olympics was an opportunity for the rifle team going to Bisley to compete for Australia. When this issue was raised as an opportunity in the March 1923 meeting, the response was that the Olympic Committee had not approached the CCRAA on the matter and that was that.638 The CCRAA Executive—with Osborne as the new and salaried Secretary—met again at the VRA offices in November 1923. The meeting announced that a hut had been purchased for £900 directly from the NRA in England. Spartan though it was, the
635 The NRA of NSW Council held no less than 20 nominees of the Commandant including several NRA members like J.J. Paine, presumably to give the NRA itself the chance to bring more of its own onto the Council; even the TRA had 12 military and one naval nominee on its council. 636 Mercury, 31 March 1923, p. 11. 637 ibid. 638 Mercury, 23 June 1923, p. 12. No Australian competed in the Olympics in rifle shooting in 1924. 15
availability of an Australian building gave an important and immediate lift to the team on their arrival at Bisley in mid-1924. 639
The CCRAA Executive also met the Minister for Defence, the Hon. Eric Kendall Bowden, in November 1923, and put their case to him with regard to Rifle Clubs grants, the need for additional funds for repair of large central military rifle ranges, and to ask for additional loan of service rifles for the Bisley team.640 Although the vote of £50,000 had been re-instituted after World War One, in reality only about £42,000 had been provided in 1921 and 1922. From this amount, major repairs had to be undertaken on the large rifle ranges as well. Could the Minister get the vote back to £50,000 and establish a separate, special vote of £42,000 for rifle range maintenance? 641 Bowden would consider it, was the cautious reply.
Despite the financial pressures, 1924 promised to be a good year. It was always a high-water mark when a team went to Bisley and despite Australia’s absence from Bisley since 1913, the riflemen dispatched were of a very high standard. While they did not win the coveted Kolapore Cup or McKinnon match, the Australians did manage to win the Empire match; the team also met with the Prince of Wales on his first ever visit to Bisley. The Australian team also used new Lithgow- produced rifles, another source of pride. 642 For Merrett, who was last in Bisley in 1913 and whose son was buried in England, a casualty of World War One, it was an emotional return.643 A number of the team were veterans, and the bonds of Empire and sense of shared sacrifice with the British
639 The hut was ‘comfortable’, especially by comparison to living under canvas as had all previous Australian teams to Bisley. Western Argus, 30 December 1924, p. 8. 640 J. McCarthy, 'Bowden, Eric Kendall (1871 - 1931)', Australian Dictionary of Biography, Vol.7, Melbourne University Press, 1979, p. 360. Bowden was Defence Minister in the first Bruce-Page Government 1923-25. He was inexperienced and largely ineffective. Lieutenant-Colonel Archibald Clifford Blacklow, DSO was selected as team captain for Bisley. An AIF veteran, Blacklow had also been a prominent member of the 1913 Australia Bisley team. 641 The ranges in question were Sandy Bay (Tasmania), Long Bay (Sydney), Warwick (Queensland), Williamstown (Victoria), Osborne, (Western Australia) and Adelaide (South Australia). 642 Report of the Commonwealth Council of Rifle Associations of Australia for the year 1924, Keating-Wood Pty Ltd, Melbourne , 1924, pp. 9-10. 643 M. Vines, 'Merrett, Sir Charles Edward (1863–1948)', Australian Dictionary of Biography, National Centre of Biography, Australian National University, http://adb.anu.edu.au/biography/merrett-sir-charles-edward-7560/text13193, accessed 22 July 2013. 16
were still strong among this body of men. At a valedictory dinner by the NRA for the Empire Cup teams, the Australian rifle team commandant Lieutenant-Colonel Blacklow stated that ‘if Britain was in trouble tomorrow, the Australians would swarm the heights of Dover in defence of the Empire.’
644 The Australian team spontaneously rose to their feet and ‘saluted the Empire.’
In December 1924, the CCRAA met again in Tasmania. 645 The Secretary, Osborne, reported that 2,000 barrels for the long .303-inch rifles had been ordered from England and a special order of 5,000 had been placed with Lithgow. Of the 7,400 long rifles on hand with the Defence Department, 5,640 were on loan to rifle clubs and 1,760 in store. The rifles in store would need re- barreling before being issued; barrels would be issued to rifle clubs as well. The 2,000 barrels from England were due to arrive in December 1924, but when Lithgow could deliver was uncertain.646 In any event, to help overcome the problem, it was decided to see whether the long .303 rifles could be modified to accept short barrels for the .303-inch SMLE. This was the first step to re-equipping the rifle clubs with the standard military rifle. It was reported that rifle clubs had expended over 6,000,000 rounds of ammunition during the past year, and, in an effort to use these stocks up and further popularise rifle shooting generally, it was recommended that the ammunition grant for efficient riflemen be raised from 200 to 250 rounds per man, and the 50 rounds gratis to new members be raised to 150 rounds.
Related to this key issue of membership and finances the Council debated whether ‘inefficient’ clubs (there were 264 around Australia including 60 in Victoria), could be made more ‘efficient’ and thereby bring in more income. If only rifle range supervisors could be put in touch with these clubs more could be done in an organisational sense.647 Again such sentiment foundered on want of funds. The never-ending demands on limited available funding and the fear that the Government
644 West Australian, 26 July 1924, p. 9. 645 From Tasmania, a new delegate was Captain William Harold Gray. A three-time wounded AIF veteran of Gallipoli and France and now militia officer, Gray was Secretary of the TRA. 646 Report of the Commonwealth Council of Rifle Associations, Keating-Wood Pty. Ltd, Melbourne, 1924, pp. 36-7. 647 Argus, 5 January 1925, p. 4. 17
would not be able or willing to provide them overshadowed everything. While the Military Committee of 1920 had agreed to move responsibility for the rifle clubs vote over to the Minister for Defence’s office, this had not lessened in any way the reliance of the rifle clubs on sporadic Government grants and assistance. Worse was that the CCRAA had little say in how to expend the grants, with expenditure directives being laid down by public servants in Treasury.
In an important signal of its deliberate divergence from the rifle club movement, in 1923 the British Army had re-instituted the ‘King’s Medal’ competition—a revival of the former ‘champion shot of the Army’ prize originally awarded by Queen Victoria in 1869—to be provided for the British Army and in each of Australia, New Zealand, South Africa (including Rhodesia), Canada and India. Competitors had to be members of the Army, Militia or Volunteer forces—in Australia this meant that civilian rifle club members were explicitly not allowed to compete. The conditions of the matches included snap shooting, rapid shooting and fire and movement at tin hat targets over ranges from 200 to 600 yards. 648
This new and exclusive military competition further underscored the difficult operating environment for the rifle club movement in the 1923-25 period. On the other hand, the visit to Sydney and Melbourne from the US Pacific Battle Fleet in late July and early August 1925, consisting of dozens of warships under the flagship USS Seattle, provided a major highlight for the rifle club movement that year. More than 25,000 officers and sailors, including 12 nurses, were entertained and feted, although in a more muted fashion than the 1908 visit of the Great White Fleet given the financial circumstances and the post-war weariness. As in 1908, rifle shooting matches were arranged (and baseball, lacrosse and boxing) in both Melbourne and Sydney. The US Fleet team won their rifle matches against all-comers.649
648 Sydney Morning Herald, 23 July 1923, p. 12. 649 See, for example, the Sydney Morning Herald, 23 July 1925, p. 3 and the Argus, 3 August 1925, p. 6. 18
In Melbourne, the US Fleet team fired against the Melbourne Rifle Club at Williamstown in a revisit of its 1908 match. One of the Melbourne riflemen was a 1908 team veteran while the US officer who had been in charge of the 1908 team, Lieutenant (now Captain) Lanning, came down from the docks to watch.650 The US Fleet had accepted a Commonwealth Ladies Rifle Club challenge to a match with Francotte rifles; the Australian ladies were keen to repeat their big win of 1908. This match may have been cancelled or at least the result unreported. In Sydney the principal match against the NRA of NSW was cancelled owing to the best men of the US Fleet Team being in Melbourne. This did not help the Australian riflemen in other matches between teams from the US Fleet, the NRA of NSW, the RAN and the CFRA. The US team still won.651
It was, other than the excitement of those visitors, a quiet sort of year for the rifle club movement. The CCRAA Executive did not meet, it seemed, because there was nothing to discuss to justify the travel expenses. The national economy remained depressed and Government budget cuts were ongoing. It was with unease that the CCRAA matches, held in Brisbane in October 1925, were conducted without a team from Western Australia, due to the reduction in the travel grant for interstate rifle teams imposed by the Department of Defence. At the CCRAA meeting on 8 October, the new DRAC, Edward Fetherstonhaugh, was placed on the defensive—the travel cuts were, he said, a misunderstanding.652
The new year, 1926, however, began with much more excitement and controversy concerning women competitors. Expert women rifle shots had been competing at association matches since 1921; this began to irk some riflemen in various state associations who were affronted by the
650 Lanning was now in command of the battleship USS Pennsylvania. 651 Argus, 1 August 1925, p. 32. 652 Sydney Morning Herald, 8 October 1925, p. 15. Fetherstonhaugh, a civil servant, had replaced W.H. Osborne in 1924. New delegates included Lieutenant-Colonel Robert Henry Beardsmore, DSO, VD. Beardsmore had won his DSO at Fromelles, for ‘conspicuous bravery’. Now an accountant in the NSW Department of Lands, Beardsmore was no stranger to the CCRAA, as captain of the 1919 AIF team at Bisley, although this was his first time as a delegate. He was later instrumental in the fall of the Lang Government in NSW. A. Argent, 'Beardsmore, Robert Henry (1873 - 1959)', pp. 231-2. 19
presence of women shooters. In February a protest was put to the VRA by a veteran rifleman of the Melbourne Rifle Club, who asked:
…what action was to be taken with reference to women firing at the annual matches? Rifle shooting was not a sport, but a duty, and the association should not allow women to take part. Riflemen had several privileges at present which they would lose should women be allowed to enter. It was illegal for women to be in rifle clubs, and illegal for them to use the Government concessional ammunition.653
Part of the basis for protest was that women were not reservists, but Honorary members and this may have raised concerns that the Defence connection could be placed under threat if Defence itself objected. In addition, and given society’s mores at the time there was almost certainly an underlying element of fears by men that traditional gender roles were under threat. The CCRAA began to field requests for adjudication on the matter, one way or the other, in part because the issue was too contentious for the State associations to handle.
Meeting over 30 September and 1 October 1926, the CCRAA Council worked through a full agenda which initially avoided the thorny issue of women competitors. Lieutenant-Colonel Osborne made a lengthy Secretary’s report, noting that it had cost Western Australia £188 more than it had received in travel grants to send a team to the matches in Tasmania in 1924 and if that State association had been able to send a team to Brisbane, it would have had to spend £224 more than it received in travel grant. Osborne wondered why the CCRAA could not be trusted by the civil servants to apportion the travel grant as it saw fit. On the positive side, work had finally begun on upgrading some of the large military rifle ranges and a range of new trophies were now being competed for.654 On the downside, however, yet another cut was made to the rifle association grant
653 Argus, 20 February 1926, p. 31 and 24 April 1926, p. 30 and Mercury, 8 July 1926, p. 12. 654 Report of the Commonwealth Council of Rifle Associations for 1926, Keating-Wood Pty. Ltd, Melbourne, 1926, pp. 10-8. For the Commonwealth and other CCRAA–managed matches held at the conclusion of the SARA meeting in Adelaide, Colonel Merrett donated a new trophy for the Commonwealth Match that year, called the ‘Cheylesmore Memorial Cup’, in memory of the late President of the NRA, Lord Cheylesmore [Herbert Francis Eaton, Major General Lord Cheylesmore, KCMG, KCVO, GBE (1848-1925)]. The new trophy replaced the McAlister Challenge Trophy, won outright by NSW in 1925, the Templeton Challenge Trophy, presented by Colonel J.M. Templeton for 20
allocation by the Department of Defence—a further £537 was lopped off as part of general savings to revenue, which reduced the vote to £48,430. However, rifle clubs everywhere would have been cheered by the news that the Minister for Defence had agreed to release 7,000 SMLE rifles to rifle clubs (on loan) to begin the replacement of the ‘long’ .303s still in service, while Lithgow was managing to produce 250 new ‘short’ barrels a month to replace worn-out ‘long’ barrels. As for another Bisley team, it was agreed to put this off once again to 1928.655
The 1926 CCRAA meeting also discussed a proposal from the Minister for Defence to change the regulations to allow Militia trainees to form their own rifle clubs. This was generally supported, including by Major Horace Clement Hugh Robertson, DSO, Chief Instructor of the Small Arms School at Randwick, who attended the meeting in an ex officio capacity.656 But suspicions remained— as the Minister had not consulted the Council as he should have—that the proposal would mean a reduced vote for the associations as money would be taken from it for the new regimental rifle clubs.657 On the other hand, there were those delegates, especially from NSW, who saw the changes positively, even hoping that it might see the demise of the CFRA, which continued to draw funds from the associations in NSW and other States.658 The DRAC, Fetherstonhaugh, noted that associations should now allow, with the formation of the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) in 1921, to have a RAAF representative on their councils.
On the second day of the meeting, the associations put forward their own agenda items. The first item to consider was the vexed question of women competitors at association matches, which ‘caused some amusing discussion’. The CCRAA report simply stated: ‘It was carried that this is not a
the Commonwealth Match in 1904 and won outright by Victoria in 1921, and the McGregor Trophy before that, won outright by Queensland in 1899. The Templeton Cup was later re-cycled by the VRA as a Club match trophy, presumably due to financial hardship during the coming Depression. It remains in the VRA trophy collection today. ibid. 655 Report of the National Rifle Association of New South Wales for 1926, H.T. Dunn & Co., Sydney, 1927, p. 11. 656 Robertson had replaced Lieutenant Colonel Beardsmore as its Officer Commanding. Robertson, a Gallipoli veteran, went on to a distinguished military career. J. Grey, 'Robertson, Sir Horace Clement Hugh (1894 - 1960)', Australian Dictionary of Biography, Volume 16, Melbourne University Press, 2002, pp. 109-110. 657 Victoria formed its own Citizen Force Rifle Association in early 1926. See the Argus, 28 April 1926, p. 14. 658 Report of the National Rifle Association of New South Wales for 1926, H.T. Dunn & Co., Sydney, 1927, p. 23. 21
question on which the Commonwealth Council should be asked to give an opinion.’659 By the time of the NRA of NSW annual matches in October 1926, which included three women competitors, the whole issue seemed to have once again temporarily receded, but the CCRAA’s avoidance of the question only exacerbated it, and it was to remain topical for another 30 years.
Importantly, at the beginning of 1927, a letter to the editor of the Sydney Morning Herald was published from the secretary of the Randwick Rifle Club, Richard Meredith Fox. It strongly criticised the election of the new Council of the NRA of NSW. Although a NSW-centred letter, it actually raised a number of issues relevant to all state associations. The main issue was one of military representation:
The whole movement stands in urgent need of a drastic rebirth to enable it to compete successfully with its more popular, though (from a national point of view less essential), rival sports, such as cricket, tennis, and golf. That end can be achieved, but …only on the basis of emphasising rifle shooting as a purely civilian sport. Some years ago the rifle club movement was reconstituted on a civilian basis, but it is something of an anachronism to find that the district base commandant still exercises his old prerogative of nominating half of the full membership of the N.R.A. Council—a body charged with the Government of civilian rifle shooting in the whole State.
Most of these military nominees are not concerned with civilian rifle shooting, and even as expert advisors to the N.R.A. Council their influence is not at all apparent. The very existence of the Citizen Forces’ Rifle Association was due primarily to the encouragement given to that body by civilian riflemen. The £200 which the N.R.A. gives annually to develop rifle shooting among the trainees and citizen forces is money which could be spent more profitably in subsidising the country [clubs]…If the military authorities were keen on rifle shooting they would finance their own association, and leave the civilian movement to work out its own salvation, realising that in the event of salvation, national necessity there would be a ready and spontaneous and more efficient co-ordinating and coalescing of the two forces for public safety.660
It was still the norm in all State associations that the State military Commander appointed up to 12 non-elected officers to sit on the State councils, and the naval Commander would also appoint an
659 Advertiser, 22 October 1926, p. 19 and Report of the Commonwealth Council of Rifle Associations for 1926, Keating-Wood Pty. Ltd, Melbourne, 1926, p. 25. 660 Sydney Morning Herald, 7 February 1927, p. 10. 22
officer (and soon, an officer from the new RAAF would join them). Even State association executive committees could have half of their number as unelected military members. Moreover, while the officers appointed were more often than not highly decorated, they did not come specifically with a rifleman’s background—although some Commanders did make an effort to find officers who did.661 It was, as Fox’s letter pointed out, a contradiction that the military had not wanted anything to do with rifle clubs in 1920 but kept control, while the rifle club movement had an opportunity to embrace the civilian sporting opening but acquiesced to military interference.662
Insofar as the organisational fortunes of the rifle club movement were concerned, in June 1927, the DRAC, Fetherstonhaugh, made his annual report to the Minister for the previous year. He reported that while rifle club membership continued to drop—by about 500 in the past year—the number of ‘efficients’ continued to rise. Tasmania was the most ‘efficient’ state, with 90 percent of its rifle club members completing their statutory requirements.663 Fetherstonhaugh’s report also noted the change to Rifle Club regulations to allow citizen force trainees to join regimental rifle clubs and the extension of the civilian rifle club regulations to those clubs. It was hoped that trainees who joined unit or regimental rifle clubs, would, upon completion of their training obligation, go on to join civilian rifle clubs. 664 Fetherstonhaugh went on to report:
The progress of the rifle club movement may be said to be almost wholly dependent upon the maintenance of a regular and sufficient supply of suitable rifles and appurtenances, and ammunition. Further, the whole object of the establishment of rifle clubs is to build up a
661 For example, the appointed officers in the TRA Council included Lieutenant-Colonel Joseph Francis Humphris, DSO, VD, who had been involved with rifle shooting ever since he was a volunteer with the SA Mounted Rifles in the 1890s, Lieutenant-Colonel A.C. Blacklow, DSO, who had been in the Australian team to Bisley in 1913 and Captain of the Australian team to Bisley in 1924, Lieutenant Charles William Croft, MC, MM, who had been a rifle club member for six years before the war, and Charles Alfred Sherry, Supervisor of Rifle Clubs. Perhaps this was a factor in Tasmania having the highest rate of efficiency of any state. Mercury, 28 June 1926, p. 2. 662 This issue was to continue as a sore point in some quarters of the rifle club movement for decades. World events and uncertainty would bring the rifle club movement back under formal Army control in 1931. The relationship was to continue to the 1960s. 663 To be classed as ‘efficient’ in 1927 meant that a rifleman had to fire three practices of eight rounds each on three separate days between July 1 and June 30 the following year. He must also keep his rifle and accoutrements in good order. 664 Mercury , 17 January 1928, p. 3. 23
"reserve" of eligible manhood, trained in the use of modern weapons, who could be called upon to supplement the active military forces in case of emergency. The training of riflemen must, therefore, conform as nearly as possible to the training of the active forces.665
With that, he urged the rifle clubs to adopt standard military targets throughout Australia, move away as soon as possible from the obsolete long rifles to the SMLE, and affiliate with the rifle associations in each State, noting that only 13 per cent of efficient riflemen were actually members of the rifle association.666 Yet by mid-1927, the membership of rifle clubs had dropped to its lowest number since before World War One—38,258.667
In 1928 another Australian rifle team was dispatched, at long last, to Bisley. The Executive of the CCRAA met in Melbourne in early January and raised four key matters with the Minister for Defence, Senator the Hon. Sir William Glasgow.668 These were requests to:
send a team to Bisley every four years instead of six (the Minister could not commit to this),
restore the rifle clubs vote to £50,000 from £48,000 (the Minister replied that the vote for 1928/1929 would not change);
increase the supply of Mk.III SMLE rifles to rifle clubs (the Minister regretted that the loan ration of one rifle to five riflemen could not be altered);
ask for implementation of the commitment by an earlier Minister (Bowden) to spend £5,000 he had promised on the Sandy Bay Range to enable Commonwealth Matches to be conducted there (the Minister opined that Launceston’s range was more than adequate for this purpose). 669
The negative responses were an ominous sign of things to come.
665 Mercury , 17 January 1928, p. 3. 666 Many riflemen affiliated for the period of the annual State rifle association prize meeting only, not seeing any point in paying fees to their club and an association. 667 Report of the Commonwealth Council of Rifle Associations for 1928, Keating-Wood Pty. Ltd, Melbourne, 1928, p. 47. 668 The CCRAA had to deal with three separate Ministers for Defence in five years - first Bowden (February 1923 - January 1925); then Sir Neville Howse, VC, MHR to April 1927, then Glasgow until October 1929. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minister_for_Defence_(Australia)#Ministers_for_Defence, accessed 12 August 2013. 669 Report of the Commonwealth Council of Rifle Associations of Australia for the year 1928, pp. 13-16 and pp. 30-34. At the meeting, the DRA&C, Fetherstonhaugh, reported that he had recovered 559 long rifles from the Navy for use by the clubs. 24
In July 1928, the Australian team at Bisley did not win the Kolapore Cup—although Victoria’s Percy Pavey (or ‘PAP’ after his initials) did manage the highest individual score of any team—and came second in the Empire Match. Honour was satisfied, however, when the Australians won the McKinnon Cup along with a number of match successes by individual team members. Successful Bisley teams remained the pinnacle of perceived achievement for the CCRAA and all of the State rifle associations. Even these successes, which normally buoyed spirits among the Council, were again overshadowed by the ongoing financial challenges. The CCRAA met again in Perth in early September 1928. A letter from the Secretary for Defence was read which made them take pause. It stated that the Commonwealth Match should not be held twice in a single financial year, i.e., it could not be held in Perth that September and again in Victoria the following March, 1929, as planned. This was reluctantly agreed and Victoria was asked to move its annual meeting into the 1930-1931 financial year instead. Unfortunately this also meant that the Commonwealth Matches could not be held in Western Australia in its centenary year either.670 This type of parsimony was a clear sign of things to come. It was the end of a difficult seven years for the rifle club movement and much, much worse was on the horizon.
In this chapter, we have seen how the rifle club movement, disconcerted at first by the outcome of the Military Committee of 1920, resolved to do its best to find an accommodation with the military. Although administration of the rifle clubs and associations clearly moved under the wing of the Minister for Defence, and away from the Army, paradoxically the Army maintained its grip of the rifle associations in each State. While the movement tried to maintain business-as-usual, the economy was poor and the post-war antipathy to things military was strong. The rifle club movement was in decline. It would be ‘saved’, ironically, by the Great Depression, which began in 1929. The years of independence from the military at the club level however, meant that that there
670 The Council was not to know that the Commonwealth Match would not be held again until 1937. Report of the [CCRAA] for 1928, Keating-Wood Pty. Ltd., Melbourne, 1929. 25
was a strong rump of rifle club members who would continue to resist military control, almost in defiance of the leadership of the CCRAA and some State rifle associations.
26
Chapter 9
The Depression years 1929-1934
The rifle club movement had not collapsed, as some rifle club movement leaders had predicted, after being moved from Army to under the Secretary, Department of Defence after the Military Committee conference of 1920. For nearly a decade after 1920, the movement also survived the lean years imposed by the economic restrictions following World War One. Successive governments starved it of funds and resources and the Army, despite not formally being in control of the movement any longer, still maintained many of the levers of control, through its appointed members of State rifle association councils and control of rifle ranges.
Outwardly, little had changed despite the change of administration to Defence. Clubs still used the Oath of Allegiance, still received free ammunition from the Government, still received rifles on loan from the Army stocks, and still fired at ranges alongside the Militia. However, as the rifle clubs were no longer directly under Army control and no longer formed its third line of reserves, something else was emerging. This was that rifle clubs began to be truly independent of the military in a way not seen since the Victorian rifle clubs under Templeton a quarter of a century before, as their civilian nature exerted itself and many clubs became comfortable with being in control of their own administration.
However, events in the period from 1929 to 1934 would exacerbate a growing tension between the leadership of the CCRAA and state rifle association councils, and the rifle clubs themselves over the direction of the rifle club movement with regard to military control. While many rifle clubs came to enjoy a sense of freedom from the military after 1920, the CCRAA executive and State delegates, many of them both veteran citizen soldiers and war veterans, were undeterred by the clear rejection by the Army in 1920. They felt that the decisions of 1920 had been a travesty of natural 1
justice and that the rifle club movement and the military remained natural partners in the defence of Australia.
While they accepted for the time being, as a survival necessity, being placed under the Secretary, Department of Defence, they actively sought ways to ingratiate themselves back with the Army, and maintained many cordial links, both personal and professional, with their military colleagues. In part this meant accepting ongoing military interference in rifle club operations. For example, the CCRAA initially endorsed, despite rifle club opposition, the Defence Department order that ‘tin- hat’ targets were to become mandatory in clubs for ranges between 200 and 600 yards, although implementation of the instruction was delayed until the start of the financial year 1930-31.671
This growing tension between rifle clubs and rifle movement leadership vis-à-vis the relationship with the military was revealed more clearly under the impact of the Great Depression which began in late 1929. The financial restrictions which had been placed on the rifle clubs since 1921, such as the moratorium on an Australian rifle team competing at Bisley, were slight compared to what would come in the years ahead. In the new and even more straitened circumstances facing the rifle clubs, however, the rifle club movement leadership saw an opportunity to return to the Army. When it did, the result was a renewal and subsequent tightening of practical military control of the rifle clubs. While many clubs—and the rifle club movement leadership—on the whole endorsed this, many clubs did not, and proved to be reluctant followers at best.
Paradoxically, the DRAC’s annual report for 1928/29 showed the number of efficients on the rise, and inefficient clubs declining in number. Trainee (Citizen Forces) rifle clubs had also increased to 92 with almost 4,500 members.672 These numbers were counted among rifle club membership overall, but strictly speaking they remained under the control of the Citizen Forces. These combined numbers probably masked a continued slow decline in underlying rifle club
671 The Army had little interest in training soldiers to shoot further than 600 yards. 672 Sydney Morning Herald, 12 March 1930, p. 16. 2
membership, but this counting of Militia rifle club numbers in overall tallies explains why, in the difficult times facing rifle clubs through the 1920s, overall numbers and numbers of efficients began to rise from 1928.
In June 1929 it became public knowledge that £800,000 was to be slashed from the Defence budget, including £150,000 from Army.673 Retrenchments in the military forces began almost immediately. Training was curtailed, bases closed, and units disbanded or amalgamated.674 The CCRAA’s Government funding was not exempt—the rifle movement grant was slashed from £48,000 to £40,000 with the result that the Commonwealth Matches were cancelled for 1929, with the hope that they would be fired again in Victoria in 1930.675 Money for travel was severely curtailed as well. Consequently in 1929 the CCRAA did not meet at all, correspondence taking the place of a physical gathering. The new Labor Government, elected in October 1929 partly on a platform to abolish compulsory military training, implemented its policy the following month; henceforth it was an all-volunteer system of enlistments for the Citizen Military Forces. 676
Bigger issues were about to take precedence. Soon after the Australian general election of October 1929, the Stock Market crashed in New York and the unmitigated global disaster known as the Great Depression began. The world financial system began to collapse. Australia was hard-hit with its currency pegged to British Sterling and with a heavy dependence on exports. It soon became clear that there would be no Commonwealth Match in March 1930. Instead, the CCRAA Executive met in Melbourne with the new Minister for Defence, Albert Ernest Green.677 The meeting discussed a number of pressing issues, led by an expected protest against the reduction in their grant. In addition, the Executive recommended to the Minister that ‘tin hat’ targets only be
673 Argus, 21 June 1929, p. 9. 674 In one cosmetic change, the Citizen Military Forces Rifle Associations became known as Militia Force Rifle Associations by mid-1930. 675 Argus, 6 April 1931, p. 3. 676 Sydney Morning Herald, 1 November 1929, p. 13 and 13 November 1929, p. 15. 677 Albert Green, Member for Kalgoorlie, was Minister for Defence from 1929 to 1931. See G.C. Bolton, 'Green, Albert Ernest (1869 - 1940)', Australian Dictionary of Biography, Vol.9, Melbourne University Press, 1983, pp. 89-90. 3
introduced to 300 yards, not up to 600 yards; that free Mk.VI ammunition be issued by way of compensation for the cuts to the grant; and that the introduction of Mk.III SMLE rifles and Mk.VII ammunition be introduced to rifle clubs across the board by mid-1932.678 Perhaps the most important item on their agenda, however, was to discuss the future administration of the rifle club movement itself.
The CCRAA delegation had seen an opportunity in the difficult financial circumstances in which not just the rifle club movement but the Government itself, found itself in. The Council proposed to the Minister that rifle clubs be moved from the Secretary, Department of Defence, where they had been placed after 1920, back to the control of the Army, specifically under the Adjutant-General, Major General Thomas Henry Dodds, believing this would allow more efficient economies.679 If this appeal to financial commonsense was not enough, the delegation added an incentive, as it saw it, to encourage a decision in its favour. It asked if the rifle clubs could also be placed once again as Reserves to the Australian Military Forces (AMF).
This issue had not been discussed at the CCRAA meeting of 1928 and if it was discussed at all prior to this meeting it must have been by only a few. In fact, when word got out about this proposal, it elicited sharp protests from both the NRA of Western Australia and the now SARA, indicating that state rifle associations had not been consulted. Colonel Merrett was forced to defend himself after a strong letter against the move was published in Western Australia, where riflemen were still sensitive to the issues with military control they had experienced before World War One. 680 While the Defence Act of 1904 had placed the rifle club men under the military as a reserve force, this had changed in 1921, when the rifle clubs were placed under the Minister and not the Army.
678 The Mk.VII ammunition was a high velocity, point-nosed bullet, finally superceding the blunt-nose Mk.VI cartridge. 679 Commonwealth of Australia - Rifle Clubs: Report of the Director of Rifle Associations and Clubs for the year ended 30 June 1930, H.J. Green, Govt. Printer, Canberra, 1930, p. 3. Also see Hill, A.J. , 'Dodds, Thomas Henry (1873 - 1943)', Australian Dictionary of Biography, Volume 8, Melbourne University Press, 1981, pp. 314-316. 680 West Australian, 9 April 1930, p. 14 and 13 May 1930, p. 16. 4
But the CCRAA’s objective to return to the Army’s fold was not to be denied. The DRAC, Fetherstonhaugh, released his 1929/30 report soon after. In it, he confirmed that the Minister had approved the transfer of rifle club administration back to military control as of 31 March 1931. The positive and quick response by the Minister to the CCRAA’s proposals was no doubt a response to the same economic pressures as were being felt by the rifle clubs and the political and economic imperative to reduce them by any means. By this time most of the State rifle associations were showing the strain as budget cuts continued, with record low prize amounts on offer, and red ink on the Treasurers’ reports. Even relatively ‘wealthy’ rifle clubs, such as the Sydney Rifle Club, were feeling the effects of the Depression by this time. In its annual report for 1930/31, it wrote:
In presenting the Annual Report for the past year, your Committee believe that they voice the opinion of members when they state that the Club has passed through one of the most strenuous periods of its existence. The great cause for regret at the present juncture is the inability of a great number of members being unable to attend owing to the existing depression causing a lot of unemployment. 681
Despite the dire economic circumstances, the number of clubs, efficients and members overall had begun to rise steadily, perhaps because the sport was cheap and the opportunity to supplement incomes from prizes was open to all. According to Fetherstonhaugh’s report, there were now 821 rifle ranges in operation throughout the Commonwealth, and there were some 132 militia rifle clubs, an increase of 40 over the previous year.682 The improvement in rifle and machine gun scores of those members of the militia rifle clubs only proved to civilian riflemen that which they had known for years—that additional practice in the rifle club environment (on top of their annual musketry course) would invariably improve the marksman capabilities of Militia. The Army, back in formal control of rifle clubs, was quick to impose new military measures on their operations.
681 Sydney Rifle Club: Annual Report and Balance Sheet 1930/31, np, Sydney, 1931, pp. 1-3. The club had a balance of £155/5/6. 682 Commonwealth of Australia - Rifle Clubs: Report of the Director of Rifle Associations and Clubs for the year ended 30 June 1930, p.1. and Argus, 6 April 1931, p. 3. 5
The CCRAA Executive was summoned to Melbourne in November 1930 to meet with representatives of the Military Board.683 Among other matters, it was agreed that the AMF ‘tin-hat’ target, with a grey top and yellow bottom would be used to 300 yards. At 500 and 600 yards, a similar coloured target but with a black bull’s-eye would be used, while at longer ranges, the traditional white target with black bull’s-eye would continue. It was also agreed that efficiency requirements for rifle club members would remain unchanged. Service matches would become compulsory however. Snap shooting (individual) and ‘tiles’ (teams) matches for military shooting would have to be placed on to every association and union match program from this point onwards, otherwise efficiency grants would not be given.684 This last decision was a measure to standardise militia and rifle club small arms shooting practices, with the rifle clubs conforming to the military requirements. The military also laid down exactly what percentage of grants the associations were to provide to conduct military matches in their programmes. All of the measures were to be adopted from 1 July 1931. Meanwhile the militia, with a nominal strength of 35,000, was well below strength due to the Depression: Tasmania, for example, had only 600 men in uniform when its nominal strength was 1,200.685
In February 1931, the Adjutant-General, Major General Dodds, issued a memo from the Military Board which noted that while there was to be no pressure placed on any rifle club, those clubs that wished to be earmarked as a reserve unit (and allocated to a Militia unit) could do so, and by doing so would allow extant Army mobilisation plans to earmark them for deployment in event of hostilities in support of their unit. As a ‘sweetener’ to these decisions, the Minister agreed to
683 As of 1 March 1930, the members of the Military Board included the Minister for Defence (A. E. Green); the Chief of the General Staff who also exercised the duties of Inspector General of the AMF (General Sir H. G. Chauvel - who had been a member of the 1920 Military Committee); the Adjutant General (Brigadier T. H. Dodds); the Quartermaster-General (Major-Gen W. A. Coxen - who replaced Chauvel as CGS in April 1931); a Finance Member; an Associate Member (Brigadier C. H. Brand - who had been responsible for establishing CFRAs in NSW and Victoria); and a Secretary. The Army Staff List of the Australian Military Forces, H. J. Green, Govt. Printer, Melbourne, 1930, p. 9. 684 Advertiser, 14 November 1930, p. 6 and Mercury, 15 November 1930, p. 5. Efficiency requirements remained at three practices a year, of eight shots each (including a sighter). This was hardly a stringent test, and perhaps couldn’t have been placed much lower for efficiency grants to be awarded. 685 Mercury, 6 February 1930, pp. 9-10. 6
increase the ammunition allowance to riflemen, while the Rifle Clubs [funding] Vote would remain as a separate item in the Defence Estimates.
The Board stated: ‘It must be realised too, that, if further economies in the Defence Department are decided upon, the vote for rifle clubs and associations can hardly hope to escape a proportionate reduction, though this is a matter which remains outside the control of the Board.’686 The Military Board was careful to point out that the rifle clubs and their associations would remain independent. Dodds further stated:
On the general question of the change of control the Military Board desire to emphasize that the Clubs are fully represented in their State Associations and the Commonwealth Council, and that the control of their administration and the power of continuing the success of the movement, in which the Board will wholeheartedly co-operate, still remains in their hands.687
Fetherstonhaugh, now acting Secretary to the Military Board, also issued a memo in March to all Army Military District, formation, and Militia unit commanders, outlining the changes to come in July.688 In it, he stated: ‘All members of the Permanent Forces are required to assist in maintaining the success and efficiency of the Rifle Club movement, and the co-operation of the Commanding Officers of Militia Units is desired.’689 Nonetheless, there were strong concerns among riflemen that the independence of rifle associations and clubs would be eroded further by the military. This was despite the protestations by the Army that rifle clubs were under no pressure to conform and despite CCRAA Chairman Merrett’s assertions to the contrary in his reply to the protest letter in Western Australia in April 1930. A columnist in South Australia noted:
The above will not be pleasant news for many riflemen in this State. The subject which would have given pleasure—no reduction in the grants to associations and unions—is not mentioned. Nothing is said about the grant, except that so much per cent of it is to be used on snap-shooting and for the association, tile shooting…Until particulars regarding the grant are received it is
686 West Australian, 3 March 1931, p. 6. 687 Department of Defence - Military Board Memo, ‘Memorandum for Members of Rifle Associations and Rifle Clubs’, dated 20 February 1931, H.J. Green, Govt. Printer, Melbourne, 1931, p. 4. 688 The Military Districts were determined largely along State boundaries. 689 Department of Defence - Military Board Memo ‘Administration of Rifle Associations and Rifle Clubs’, dated 4 March 1931, NAA SP 459, Item 411-4-211. 7
difficult to say how the associations, unions, and clubs have fared as a result of the conference…one fails to see why the associations, unions, and clubs were not given an opportunity to consider the recommendations before they were sent on to the Minister. 690
Another manifestation of increasing military control was that various supervisors of rifle clubs in Military Districts found some of their duties taken from them and given to the military staff officer now allotted in each State to report to the State Commandant on rifle clubs. For example, such military staff officers:
in addition to his normal military duties, has been charged with the preparation of mobilisation plans for Rifle Clubs, the organisation of Rifle Clubs as military reserves, and the allocation of clubs to militia units, all of which are definitely military duties for which the civilian Supervisor of Rifle Clubs is neither competent nor qualified to perform.691
So from 1 July 1931, the rifle club movement effectively reverted back to the situation of 1914; even Cable Guards were back in vogue. As in the years before World War One, Cable Guards were rifle club members who were assigned to guard the strategic points around Australia where the international telegraph cables came ashore. Cable Guards were given militia pay, honorary ranks, uniforms and webbing, and were regarded as a unit in military terms.692 Ten years of civilian administration had been accepted, even preferred, by civilian rifle clubs since moved from Army to the Minister for Defence after the Military Committee conference of 1920.
While some grumbled about the continued military dominance of association councils, on the whole rifle clubs had gone about their own business unfettered by direct military control of any sort.693 Since the end of World War One a whole new generation of members who had known neither war, nor military control, had joined rifle clubs. Unfortunately, figures are not available which show the essential demographics let alone the numbers of ‘pure’ civilian versus military or
690 Advertiser, 2 January 1931, p. 14. 691 Letter Military Board to Commandant 2nd Military District dated 13 June 1931, ‘Administration of Rifle Associations and Rifle Clubs’, NAA SP 459, Item 411-4-425. 692 Australian Rifle Club Regulations 1931, H. J. Green, Govt. Printer, Melbourne, 1931, pp. 9-10. 693 Sydney Morning Herald, 23 April 1931, p. 10. The CCRAA remained controlled by former military officers for years to come. 8
former military men in rifle clubs by 1930. However, what is known is that by mid-1930: ‘Out of 1,025 clubs in the Commonwealth, only 398 are affiliated with State Rifle Associations, and of the 37,818 riflemen only 2,990 are members of State Associations.’694
Meanwhile the economy continued to deteriorate, with further consequences for rifle club funding. The 1930-1931 Rifle Clubs Grant was reduced further, to £33, 617. The DRAC report to 30 June 1931 noted: ‘that the reduction of the vote was countered chiefly by reducing the provision for the construction of new ranges.’695 It went on to state:
While this expedient serves at the moment, it is only a matter of time when construction of, and repairs to, rifle ranges will require additional funds, and unless extra appropriations are made in future there will be no option but to divert a proportion of the amounts now devoted to grants to rifle associations and clubs towards the maintenance of ranges. 696
At the same time, the number of clubs continued to rise (to 1,177), as did efficiency (to 88 per cent), with an overall membership of 44,946, the highest for a decade.697 Again, this reflected the changing nature of the movement with Militia rifle clubs numbering 128 while 557 civilian rifle clubs had applied to be allotted to a militia unit as a reserve rifle club.698 These figures were extraordinary. Men were joining rifle clubs in unprecedented numbers at a time when unemployment had struck figures of about 30 per cent. The chance to win some prize-money remained a motivation because only the Cable Guards received their efficiency allowance (in their case £1) personally. By late 1931 the international situation was unstable, with Japan invading Manchuria, but AMF numbers reached their lowest point that year, and the rifle club vote was reduced even further to £25,007. There seemed to be no connection, therefore, between the external international situation and the rise in
694 Mercury, 14 May 1931, p. 12. 695 Sydney Morning, 27 April 1932, p. 12. 696 ibid. 697 ibid. 698 Mercury, 27 April 1932, p. 10. 9
rifle club numbers, and the increase may have had more to do with social reasons such as giving unemployed or under-employed men a sense of purpose.699
In mid-1931 the CCRAA tried to encourage the more independent clubs to affiliate with their State rifle associations. Although it was agreed to cover the cost of the affiliation through the efficiency grants, the fact is that clubs were reluctant to give up their independence, and the scheme promoted by the CCRAA initially found few takers. As a result, when new Rifle Club Regulations were issued, it became mandatory to do so from 1 July 1932.700 The regulations were clear—the Military Board controlled rifle clubs; the DRAC controlled the associations, including the CCRAA, on its behalf.701 Military District commanders (the former State commandants) controlled the State rifle clubs and the State Supervisor of Rifle Clubs worked for the Army commanders.
This was essentially little different from what had been the case before World War One, but whatever the depth of feeling about the changes, 1931 was not the year in which to protest. Ever higher efficiency demands were placed on rifle clubs, putting more pressure on them to maintain the standards for membership. From this point rifle clubs were not to have less than 15 efficient members and not more than 30 per cent inefficient members, otherwise the club would be disbanded. The CCRAA did not object, and was criticised accordingly, perhaps most strongly in Western Australia.
In September 1931, Colonel Merrett travelled to Western Australia to attend the State rifle association’s annual prize shoot. Perhaps Merrett felt, as the CCRAA or its Executive had again not been able to meet in 1931 due to the financial restrictions that he should show the CCRAA flag in
699 Sydney Morning Herald, 8 April 1933, p.14. Some observers suspected ‘padding’ of club memberships to obtain extra supplies of ammunition to be the cause of the increase in numbers. 700 Australian Rifle Club Regulations 1931, dated 31 October 1931, p. 6. 701 Members of the Military Board at 1 May 1931 included the Minister for Defence (J. B. Chifley); the CGS (now Coxen); AG (Dodds); QMG (Brand); a Finance Member; and the new Assistant Secretary (E. Fetherstonhaugh, formerly DRA&C). The Staff and Regimental Lists of the Australian Military Forces, 1 May 1931, H. J. Green, Govt. Printer, Melbourne, 1931, p. 9. 10
the ‘West’, given the greatest resistance to changes to rifle club administration had come from that State (the Depression had also encouraged serious consideration of secession from the Commonwealth).702 In a speech he appealed to the Western Australians’ sense of patriotism:
The public would be astonished if they could see a map of Australia whereon were dotted the various places where rifle clubs have been formed. Western Australia has several of these clubs, which are of great strategical value. That is, there are organised men armed with a rifle who, under the Defence Act, could be called upon for service in time of need…Australia is dotted with these little outposts of loyal, patriotic citizens who can be depended upon in time of need. 703
It did little good. While the vast majority of riflemen adjusted to the changes at the top, unrest among riflemen prevailed in Western Australia. For example, in January 1932, the new Commandant, Brigadier Athelstan Markham Martyn (a keen rifle shot himself) felt compelled to note, in a speech at Kalgoorlie:
The rifle movement was coming to be recognised as something akin to the military. In some States the alliance with the military was not taken too kindly and keen resentment was shown in parts to what was considered the 'interference' of the military authorities. However, in most instances great benefit had been reaped as a result of the combination. There were matters which could be dealt with much more effectively by the military man than by the civilian.704
Resentment towards military control was not restricted to Western Australia. In NSW, a strongly worded letter attacked the NSW Commandant and NRA of NSW President, Brigadier Francis Bede Heritage, for choosing to reduce the number of civilian appointees of the military on the rifle association council by removing those who were also holding positions in rifle clubs. The president of a Sydney rifle club protested:
The civilian riflemen will seriously resent any attempt to foist a military government on their sport because they have had a long and bitter experience of its unsympathetic and inefficient control. The civilian rifle club movement in New South Wales has laboured and suffered serious disorganisation under this unhelpful military domination. It lost thousands of active and potential members in being forced out of Randwick range to Long Bay and then from Long Bay
702 West Australian, 30 June 1931, p. 5. 703 West Australian, 1 September 1931, p. 8. 704 West Australian, 25 January 1932, p. 12. See also R. McNicoll, 'Martyn, Athelstan Markham (1881 - 1956)', Australian Dictionary of Biography, Vol.10, Melbourne University Press, 1986, pp. 429-30. 11
to the outlandish Liverpool range and even here the increasing invasions by the militia clubs and machine gun units seem to indicate that in a few years the civilian rifle clubs will be sent further afield.705
Antipathy by unit commanders to rifle clubs was strong, especially when the rifle clubs were competing for scarce military resources like rifle ranges.
In an overall sense, there is no doubt that the 1931/32 year was one of the toughest ever felt by the rifle club movement in its entire history although it appeared on the face of it to be in robust health. The DRAC report for the year ending 30 June 1932 noted that the rifle club movement was strong, despite the financial pressures, with: ‘1172 rifle clubs, with 44,537 members...of this number 39,964 members, or 90 per cent, were efficient...as well as 90 miniature rifle clubs throughout the States, with membership of 2770, while 56 miniature ranges were in operation.’706 Nonetheless, a moratorium was imposed on new rifle clubs being formed or rifle ranges being constructed, range maintenance was minimised, while numbers at some State rifle association prize meetings were dropping along with prize money.707
Over the 1931-1932, no meetings of the CCRAA or its Executive were held. Yet, while the effects of the Great Depression still had a long way to run, CCRAA delegates, especially the Chairman, Colonel Merrett, had not lost sight of the longer-term objectives of the rifle club movement and continued to work to achieve those objectives whenever and however possible. The ban on any new clubs forming due to financial restrictions was still in force, however, leading to a decline in club numbers once again. The renewal of the Commonwealth Match remained a pipe-dream. It was finally announced that the CCRAA would hold a meeting in Melbourne in late
705 Sydney Morning Herald, 28 January 1932, p. 6. 706 Sydney Morning Herald, 8 April 1933, p. 14. 707 Western Australian, 19 April 1933, p. 4. 12
October 1932, its first since 1928. A CCRAA deputation subsequently waited on the Minister for Defence, Sir George Pearce, to raise a number of key issues directly with him.708
The most pressing concern was the reduced vote, which for the 1931-1932 year had declined further to just £22,644 exclusive of salaries (£26,000 altogether). The Council faced continuing challenges—no money for Commonwealth Matches, very little money for the CCRAA itself, no money for new clubs, and, contrary to expectations when the move back to Army control was made, no immediate relief even with the change of administration. While the Adjutant-General, Dodds, addressed the Council and ‘stressed the great value of the Riflemen from a reserve point of view’, and although Minister Pearce also expressed sympathy for the Council’s issues and travails, there was no succour financially, at least not in the short term.709 At the October 1932 meeting, Merrett floated an idea for a riflemen’s camp to boost reserve numbers, while there was some discussion of using unemployed with a Government grant to effect improvements on rifle ranges.710 A spirited debate on the utility of the single-arm sling to improve marksmanship ended the meeting.711 A majority of delegates wanted the slings made compulsory from July 1933 against the common-sense opposition from NSW, which was ‘under the impression that the only reason why a service rifle was equipped with a sling at all was for the sole purpose of enabling a soldier to carry the weapon on the march.’712
Little changed for the better in the following year. The grant in 1932/33 was unchanged. Figures issued by the DRAC on 30 June 1932 showed a small drop in rifle club membership and efficients,
708 Pearce represented Australia on the Empire delegation at the Washington Disarmament Conference held between November 1921 and February 1922. See B. Beddie, 'Pearce, Sir George Foster (1870 - 1952)', Australian Dictionary of Biography, Vol.11, Melbourne University Press, 1988, pp. 177-82. 709 Report of the National Rifle Association of New South Wales for the Year ending 30 June 1933, W.J. Anderson, & Co., Sydney, 1933, pp. 20 and 24. 710 West Australian, 25 November 1932, p. 24. 711 Until then, a double arm sling was able to be used. Fifty-four and a quarter inches long, it went around both arms to give the shooter additional stability, hence the ‘double-arm’ sling. It was not permitted following the adoption of the SMLE from 1 July 1933 for Service Matches, and from 1st July 1936 for all competitions. 712 Report of the National Rifle Association of New South Wales for the Year ending 30 June 1933, pp. 21-4. 13
no doubt the result of the high unemployment.713 There was no CCRAA Council meeting in 1933, but there was a conference in May 1933 between Military Board representatives and the Lithgow Small Arms Factory to discuss an associated range of matters. Lithgow had been converting old long .303-inch rifles to the new short barrels, but no SMLE rifles had been produced since 1929 as ‘people were forgetting how to make them.’714 The changeover to the service rifle for rifle clubs, foreshadowed for 1933, was of primary concern to the CCRAA.
Morale in clubs improved when it became known that the Military Board had approved payment of efficiency grants to civilian rifle clubs on the same per capita basis as the previous year, that is: ‘5/- for each member of country clubs and 2/6 for city clubs.’ 715 There was also a palpable excitement among riflemen about the introduction of the Mk.VII ammunition and the service SMLE rifle from 1 July 1933. The last of the Mk.VI ammunition and the long .303 inch rifles were to be phased out by 30 September, but not before some faulty lots of war-made Mk.VII ammunition had to be recalled by the Defence Department.716
On other fronts, it appeared that issues were resolving in favour of the rifle club movement. It was announced in October 1933 that that the CCRAA had managed to obtain an increase of £5,000 in the grant for the 1933/34 year. In part a grass-roots campaign by CCRAA Chairman Merrett probably gave some impetus towards that decision. In February 1933 he had issued a circular through rifle clubs to all riflemen that set out the straitened circumstances of the movement, the efforts and contributions made by riflemen in difficult times and an appeal to increase the vote to rifle clubs by £5,000.717 Many riflemen sent the circular to their Members of Parliament—in the case of NSW, riflemen were actively encouraged to do so and even provided
713 Commonwealth of Australia - Rifle Clubs: Report of the Director of Rifle Associations and Clubs for the Year ended 30 June 1932, L.F. Johnston, Commonwealth Govt. Printer, Canberra, 1934, pp. 1-5. 714 T. Griffiths, Lithgow’s Small Arms Factory, Vol.1, 1907-1950, p. 234. 715 Courier-Mail, 14 October 1933, p. 4. 716 Courier-Mail, 29 September 1933, p. 9. 717 Report of the Commonwealth Council of Rifle Associations of Australia for 1933, pp. 17-18. 14
with a draft cover letter to go with the circular.718 As Merrett later put it: ‘I am of the opinion that the issue of this memorandum has assisted the Minister in inducing Parliament to agree to an increase in the Vote for rifle clubs and Associations.’719
To alleviate complaints regarding the slow introduction of the new short .303-inch service rifles, in August 1933, the Munitions Supply Board ordered that rifle production should begin again at about 1,000 a year thereafter. No complete rifles were made in 1933-34, but extensive preparations commenced to do so.720 Merrett had played an important role in introducing the heavy barrel to the short .303 magazine Lee-Enfield. 721 In late 1933 it was also announced by the Government that militia training would be extended to country districts, which was seen as a positive step for the expansion of new rifle clubs. 722
There was another increase to the rifle movement grant of almost £5,000 in mid-1934 and a lifting of the moratorium on forming new rifle clubs, while a further £3,000 was added to the Estimates for 1934/35. By June 1934, 59 new rifle clubs were approved, 35 new rifle ranges were constructed and additional funds provided for the upkeep of 160 other rifle ranges. By late 1934, approval was also given for a further 50 new rifle clubs. 723 This improvement in the general financial situation was also reflected in approval and funds being given for a full meeting of the Council and not just of the Executive Committee. Subsequently, the CCRAA held its meeting in Melbourne over 29 and 30 October, 1934, following the successful VRA Centenary matches in
718 CCRAA Circular dated 10 February 1933 and Secretary NRA of NSW letter to 2nd Battalion (Newcastle) Rifle Club dated 22 February 1933, NAA SP459, Item 411-4-482 719 Report of the Commonwealth Council of Rifle Associations of Australia for 1933, p. 19. 720 T. Griffiths, Lithgow’s Small Arms Factory and its People, Vol.1, 1907-1950, p. 235. 721 Seventy-second Annual Report of the Victorian Rifle Association 1932-1933, Keating-Wood Pty. Ltd., Melbourne, pp. 19- 20. Merrett was honoured as a Commander of the British Empire, in the Civil Division, in 1929. In January 1934, he was also knighted for his services to agriculture in Victoria. 722 West Australian, 14 October 1933, p. 16. Not surprisingly, however, given economic conditions in England, the NRA announced that it could not afford to send a rifle team to Australia in 1934. 723 Report of the Commonwealth Council of Rifle Associations of Australia for 1934, Keating-Wood Pty. Ltd., Melbourne, 1935, p.16, and Courier-Mail, 17 August 1934, p. 12. 15
Melbourne.724 It started to seem that it would not be long before it was business as usual, and a return to the pre-World War One status quo achieved.
Financial conditions continued to ease. Money was loosening up, although it would take years to get back to 1914 or even pre-Depression levels. The full CCRAA met in Melbourne on 29 and 30 October 1934. The meeting followed on from the VRA’s matches in which an interstate match was also shot for the first time; it was a poor substitute for the Commonwealth Match, but at least it attempted to keep the interstate rivalry alive.725 Victoria’s centenary matches, however, were postponed to March 1935. The meeting began with an address by the Army Chief of Staff, Major- General Julius Henry Bruche, standing in for the Adjutant-General, Dodds, who was about to retire. Bruche gave an upbeat assessment of progress for the rifle club movement. 726 Once he had departed, there was much to talk about.
The Council discussed the use of suspect 1918 ammunition, of which there was still six months supply, and establishing new clubs only in settled areas where they could be properly supported. There was a long discussion of the changeover to the new service rifles and the problems encountered with the fore-end and back-sights as well as barrels. The Small Arms Factory was asked to arrange for more exhaustive tests of rifles to minimise bedding flaws. The meeting confirmed the use of single slings for competition, but not until 1936. It also accepted the impossibility of re- instituting the Commonwealth match or a Bisley team before that year either. The Council also discussed uniform shooting regulations for all States, and the adoption of a single pattern uniform for riflemen.727 It seemed like business as usual had almost returned. While Australia recovered relatively quickly from the years of the Great Depression, however, defence continued to stagnate as
724 At these matches, an ‘Inter-State’ match was held, which included a New Zealand team, as a poor substitute for the still moribund Commonwealth Match. 725 Report of the Commonwealth Council of Rifle Associations of Australia for 1934, Keating-Wood Pty. Ltd., Melbourne, 1935, p. 17. 726 Report of the Commonwealth Council of Rifle Associations of Australia for 1934, pp. 38 and 49. Details of Bruche can be found at S. Rowell, 'Bruche, Sir Julius Henry (1873 - 1961)', Australian Dictionary of Biography, Vol.7, Melbourne University Press, 1979, pp. 462-3. 727 West Australian, 12 November, 1934, p. 8., and Mercury, 6 December 1934, p. 16. 16
Government priorities remained with the economic and social recovery. The rifle club movement in turn, which by its own initiative had been returned to Army control in 1931, continued to be relegated to among the lowest of Army’s own budget priorities as the Army maximized expenditure of its limited budget on rebuilding the military forces.
Nonetheless, if it had not been for the indefatigable efforts of Merrett and other leaders in the rifle club movement to leverage every possible opportunity—such as the decision to try to return rifle clubs back to Army—to protect and sustain the rifle clubs, they may well have been in an even worse position at the end of the Great Depression. But survival came at a price. Just as forward-looking rifle club men had begun to relish having a large measure of control over their own affairs since 1920, especially after the long period of general animosity between the military and the rifle clubs, the military returned once again to control the rifle club movement. In the eyes of those who resisted military control, not only had their leadership let them down by pandering to the Army, but the rifle movement itself had regressed to pre-World War One days. Under the current military regime, moreover, it appeared that the movement was operating under even more controls and restrictions than ever before. As the international situation continued to deteriorate, it seemed that the rifle clubs would at last be able to fulfill their military destiny. Among the conservative rifle club leadership, their hopes were summed up by C. Howard Cromack, Secretary of the Metropolitan District Rifle Club Union in NSW, who stated in 1933 that: ‘The view is held by many thousands of the citizens of our Commonwealth that rifle shooting is not only a recreation but a national duty, an art which all men should learn to master in case of some urgent necessity to defend our homes and our country.’728
728 Sydney Morning Herald, 7 January 1933, p. 17. 17
Chapter 10
Sidelined, again 1935-1941
This chapter will complete the examination of the rifle club movement and defence through to 1941. As noted in the previous chapter, the leaders of the movement had worked assiduously to bring rifle clubs back under formal Army control since being rejected by the military in 1920. In 1931 they finally achieved their goal, but in the meantime civilian rifle clubs had become used to being their own masters. The move back to military control in 1931 was not universally welcomed by rifle clubs, especially when the military immediately began to strengthen their control. This chapter will explore why the rifle club movement was unable to capitalise on its apparently strong position as a Reserve when World War Two broke out in 1939. As we will see, the rifle club movement was to be sidelined, again.
The period 1935-1941 began positively but ended disastrously for the rifle club movement. No sooner had it begun to recover from the impact of the Great Depression when World War Two broke out. The movement found itself disregarded when the Government and the Army chose to form an entirely new Volunteer Defence Force created to help the small regular forces defend Australian soil against possible invasion. Consequently, the rifle clubs had their weapons impressed and their activities placed in recess for the duration of the war. However, even with the deterioration in the international security situation, the last thing the rifle clubs expected was such a dire outcome. If anything, the possibility of war seemed to those in the rifle club movement to vindicate the view expressed in 1937 by Colonel Sir Charles Merrett, Chairman of the Commonwealth Council of Rifle Associations of Australia (CCRAA) that ‘Rifle shooting was more than a sport; it was a national and Empire necessity.’ 729
729 Advertiser, 31 December 1937, p. 10. 1
By 1935 the international political and strategic situation had been deteriorating for some time. Japan had invaded Manchuria and started a long, but undeclared war against China, in 1932. When criticised for this, Japan responded by withdrawing from the League of Nations in 1933, followed soon after by Germany, now under the control of the Nazi Party of Adolf Hitler. In Australia, there was some concern but little was done to improve defence preparedness, although in 1935 an increase in militia strength was authorised.730 By the end of 1937, Abyssinia had been annexed by Italy, Germany had cast off the Versailles Treaty, civil war was underway in Spain, and Japan had deepened its incursion into China. It was against this backdrop that the rifle club movement struggled to revitalise itself after the parsimony of the Depression years and continuing financial restrictions and more observers of the defence situation tried to raise the level of alarm it believed should have been felt by all Australians at the strategic situation. Meanwhile, the British commitment to the ‘fortress of Singapore’ was met with increasing but still small, investment by Australia in its defence. Defence expenditure increased from £3 200 000 in 1932 to £8 876 000 in 1936.731 This was especially so after 1938, which saw a big jump in militia numbers to around 76 000 by mid-1939.732
For the rifle club movement, 1934 ended with some hope that standing financial restrictions were coming to an end, but in 1935, this hope was dashed; restrictions continued. The CCRAA was not allowed to meet, or even its executive committee, so most business was carried on by Colonel Merrett and the Secretary by letter.733 In August, not long after the Government announced a new three-year defence modernization program with increased expenditure—especially for the Army— riflemen everywhere were shocked by an official Government announcement that as rifle ammunition stocks were low, the issue of free ammunition to individual riflemen was to be halved, to 100 rounds.734
730 Argus, 13 November 1935, p. 8. 731 Sydney Morning Herald, 3 November 1936, p. 11. 732 Sydney Morning Herald, 9 June 1939, p. 10. 733 Army headquarters finally approved a meeting of the Executive Committee of the Council only in September 1936. Report of the Commonwealth Council of Rifle Associations of Australia for 1935, Keating-Wood, Melbourne, 1936, p. 7. 734 Argus, 22 July 1935, p. 3. 2
The response was immediate, with numerous letters to newspaper editors decrying what was seen as a short-sighted policy. 735 John Samuel Eastmon, Secretary of the National Rifle Association (NRA) of Western Australia and a CCRAA delegate, believed he saw a bigger picture in a letter to the West Australian:
I would like to point out...that it is not wise to stem our voluntary defence when wars seem imminent. Our greatest British statesmen are deeply concerned and if our supplies of ammunition are only bare reserves, then it is high time that the Maribyrnong factory was accelerated to make up any leeway, and take no chance of a public outcry by being caught slumbering. 736
Despite the apparent set-back with regards to ammunition, the year ended on a high note for the movement. The NRA of NSW, not in the least fazed by such developments, offered its usual substantial prize-money for its October meeting. The Government also agreed to provide £750 towards the cost of having a British rifle team come out to Australia in September 1936 to join the South Australian centenary matches, and also a further £850 to hold the Commonwealth Matches in Adelaide as well. A British rifle team had not been to Australia since 1920, while the Commonwealth Matches had not been fired since 1928, so there was considerable excitement associated with these announcements. 737
The beginning of 1936 however, saw the proposed reductions in free ammunition enforced and, disappointedly, the British team postponed its visit due to the straitened financial circumstances of its own national rifle association.738 By this time, as reported by the Director of Rifle Associations and Clubs (DRAC) in mid-1936, the total number of riflemen in Australia was 49,180, with 1,175
735 One TRA Committee member estimated that while the Government was paying out about £90,000 a year for ammunition, but the riflemen were paying out of their own pockets between £150-170,000 a year. The Captain of the Queanbeyan Rifle Club in NSW suggested that the ‘red tabs’ [military officers] were trying to: ‘…exterminate the rifle club movement.’ Report of the Commonwealth Council of Rifle Associations of Australia for 1935, Keating-Wood, Melbourne, 1936, pp. 30-32, Mercury, 25 July 1935, p. 5, Sydney Morning Herald, 14 August 1935, p. 8. 736 West Australian, 6 August 1935, p. 16. 737 Argus, 13 December, 1935, p. 5 and 16 December, 1935, p. 3. 738 However, several months later, with the announcement of a Royal visit to Australia for its 150th year celebrations in 1938, another invitation was issued to the NRA to send a team in that year. 3
civilian clubs (efficiency 92 per cent) and 130 regimental clubs (efficiency 88 per cent). The report noted that the Government grant was now £32,250, an increase of £1,770 over the previous year.739 To add to the roller-coaster of the rifle clubs’ fortunes, in July came the morale-boosting announcement by the Minister for Defence, Robert Archdale Parkhill, that a gift of £5,000 from a Sydney businessman, John Woolcott-Forbes, made it possible to send an Australian team to Bisley in July 1937, a coronation year.740 Following the Adelaide matches in September 1936, and riding a rising tide of optimism in the rifle club movement, the CCRAA Executive was given approval by the Minister for Department of the Army to allowed to meet to discuss this important development.741
Soon after, the NRA in England accepted a second invitation to send out a rifle team in 1938 for a five month tour, while in late 1936 came the news that the NRA of NSW would offer the incredible sum of £12,000 for the sesquicentenary meeting in Sydney in 1938, exceeding the prize money on offer at Bisley for the first time.742 It was a brilliant piece of marketing. The DRAC, however, noted that funds were still too limited to allow any more new rifle clubs to be formed until the next round of Estimates had been passed by Parliament; while free ammunition for State prize shoots would have to end for the same reason (although half of the previously cut ammunition supplies for rifle clubs could now be re-instated).743
739 Mercury, 9 June, 1937, p. 4. 740 Argus, 26 August 1936, p. 8. For details of Parkhill of the United Australia Party, see C.J. Lloyd, 'Parkhill, Sir Robert Archdale (1878 - 1947)', Australian Dictionary of Biography, Vol.11, Melbourne University Press, 1988, pp. 142-3. For details of Woolcot-Forbes see the Argus, 30 March 1937, p. 8. 741 Colonel Merrett was appointed as team commandant for England, a fitting pinnacle to his many long years of service to rifle shooting. It was also announced that the Australian team could use the Lithgow-produced service rifles with the heavy barrels. As the cost of heavy barrels meant loan rifles to rifle clubs could not be converted, it was agreed that the converted (cut-down) long .303 rifles could continue to be used indefinitely in the clubs, to everyone’s relief. See Report of the National Rifle Association of New South Wales for the Year ending 30 June 1937, W. J. Anderson, Sydney, 1937, p. 14. 742 Sydney Morning Herald, 28 December 1936, p. 6. 743 Argus, 7 November 1936, p. 28. 4
In January 1937 the CCRAA discussions concerning Bisley continued.744 Along with the routine matters, such as the decision that for the first time ever the team members would be issued with Australian team blazers in green and gold, there were more serious matters at hand. For example, there were objections to a report from Parliament which suggested that the Minister wanted to ‘impose a physical fitness regulation affecting rifle club units, and also limit membership of rifle clubs to 50,000 on aggregate.’ 745 Foremost on the agenda, however, was a series of aggressive recommendations put forward by the Department of Defence. The recommendations by the Department to the CCRAA were that:
the CCRAA should be replaced by a Board with plenary powers to act given that the full Council had not been able to meet regularly and the Executive Committee was conducting the business of the Council
the amount of salary paid to the Secretary was too large and the work could be done by a State secretary at lesser cost
given the cost of holding Council meetings, that representation should be reduced to one from each association, except for New South Wales
the State rifle associations should have a standard constitution [this was agreed]
the CCRAA constitution should therefore also be re-written: ‘with a view to the better functioning of the Council.’
uniform match rules and targets should be implemented’ [this was agreed, but the Council wanted to replace ‘tin hat’ targets at 300 yards with a circular aiming mark]. 746
744 The new Adjutant-General, Major General Sir Carl Jess came to the meeting to make an opening address. For details of Jess, see C.D. Coulthard-Clark, 'Jess, Sir Carl Herman (1884 - 1948)', Australian Dictionary of Biography, Vol. 9, Melbourne University Press, 1983, pp. 485-7. 745 West Australian, 7 January 1937, p. 6 and Report of the National Rifle Association of New South Wales for the Year ending 30 June 1937, p. 13. The Minister later denied he’s made such a statement and it was the Estimates which would determine the figure. Report of the Commonwealth Council of Rifle Associations of Australia for the Year 1938, np, Melbourne, 1938, p. 13. 746 Report of the National Rifle Association of New South Wales for the Year ending 30 June 1937, pp. 11-3. Western Australia was additionally upset by the allocation of £18,000 against the Rifle Club Vote in Parliament ‘for the sole purpose of the manufacture of Mark VII ammunition to replace 50 rounds of the present free issue of Mark VI ammunition. This was the first occasion that a charge for ammunition had been made against the rifle clubs vote.’ West Australian, 3 February 1937, p. 7. 5
Despite this apparent attempt by the Army to interfere further with and control the CCRAA’s operations, and the continuing and frustrating financial restrictions imposed by Defence, the routine business of rifle shooting went on. The rifle club movement appeared to be robust—the DRAC report for mid-June 1937 showed that there were now 1,173 civilian rifle clubs with membership of 50,241 (of whom 46,908 were deemed to be efficient). There were 133 regimental clubs with 7,120 members, of whom 6,680 were efficient. The report noted that sales of short rifles with the heavy barrel increased by 2,573 for the year. Of efficient civilian riflemen, 31 per cent had purchased their own rifles, with total sales since these rifles were made available being 32,526. Among other minutiae of the DRAC’s report was the remarkable figure of 10,199,760 rounds of ammunition expended (7,627,905 rounds of which were issued free).747
Nonetheless, the CCRAA was forced to announce that due to the scheduling of matches and finances, the next Commonwealth Match set for Victoria would not be held until March 1938, that is, there would be no match in 1937.748 On the other hand, by February 1938 a record of over 1,800 entries had been received for the sesquicentenary matches scheduled in Sydney and prize money had now risen to over £11,500, an enormous sum. 749 With the arrival of the British rifle team in Fremantle that December, it seemed that the slowly rising tide of good news in 1937, despite some lingering financial stringencies, would continue on into 1938.
While the apparent improvement to rifle club movement fortunes continued, many political and military leaders (including the rifle club leadership) had growing concerns about the continuing international uncertainties. Placing the ongoing rifle shooting developments in that context was, at a civic reception in Fremantle for the British team, CCRAA Chairman Sir Charles Merrett, who noted:
747 DRAC reports were usually released about nine months after the period of the report. Mercury, 30 March 1938, p. 12. 748 West Australian, 24 August 1937, p. 11. The Victorians had to provide £750 to the CCRAA for the privilege. See the Argus, 25 October 1937, p. 20. 749 Sydney Morning Herald, 7 February 1938, p .9. 6
Bisley rifle meetings illustrated the unity of the Empire, and the spirit of comradeship exemplified there would stand in times of stress. In Australia rifle clubs taught young men how to shoot, and though there was no suggestion that Australia was looking for or fearing trouble, it was as well to convince outsiders of the country's strength, and so discourage them from making an attack.750
It was a theme which would be repeated again and again during the visit of the British team; there is no doubt that an increasingly difficult international security situation was beginning to weigh more heavily on everyone concerned with the defence of Australia.
Accordingly, it was only logical, in the minds of riflemen, that the Government would ‘expand’ rifle clubs and resources. Yet, in May 1938, the Adjutant-General decreed that new memberships of rifle clubs were to be frozen, despite a detailed letter containing a direct personal appeal from Merrett extolling the Minister to support increased members in rifle clubs.751 A Courier Mail editorial declared that:
It is unfortunate that the military authorities should have deemed it necessary to close the membership of rifle clubs, except for the filling of vacancies...though rifle clubs cannot be a sufficient substitute for training in national defence they make a valuable contribution to it. They afford an opportunity to men who have passed through the military forces to retain their proficiency as marksmen, and they can make fitter for a fundamental duty of citizenship, men whom age or occupation debars from enlistment in the militia…they would be a valuable auxiliary to the country's defence in any emergency.752
Protests were made against this decision across Australia. Merrett stated that rifle clubs could have 100,000 men if the facilities were provided, and importantly, that 75 per cent of riflemen were of military age.753 Essentially funding priorities lay behind the military decision, as the defence department were trying to fund an expansion of the Militia at this time from a limited budget and so many military figures were quite content to restrict rifle club membership.754 After all, military
750 Advertiser, 23 December 1937, p. 6. 751 Report of the Commonwealth Council of Rifle Associations of Australia for the Year 1938, np, Melbourne, 1938, pp. 10-12. 752 Courier Mail, 13 May 1938, p. 4. 753 It is not clear whether Merrett’s figures for military-age riflemen were statistically reliable. 754 Sunday Times, 15 August 1937, p. 20S. 7
officers had been working to do just that since the 1890s, not least because the rifle club movement (and its leaders) had shown in the past that it could resist the military’s attempts to turn the movement into a more efficient and effective arm of the defence reserve structure. This was no less the case now than when Hutton was Commander-in-Chief in 1902-04. The dynamics which had split off the rifle club movement from the Army in 1920 was also no less apparent in 1938 as the military chiefs and some politicians tried to rebuild Australia’s defences while under tight financial restrictions. Yet the decision was a bitter pill.
Even the venerable rifle club movement veteran Brigadier G.H. Dean wrote to the editor of the Advertiser:
That the enrolment in our second line of defence should be in any way curtailed at the present juncture seems a short-sighted policy, especially when our militia units (I speak for this State [SA] only) are so much under effective in strength. …It is to this reserve that we shall have to look to fill up our militia units to their proper strength should the emergency arise. At any rate the rifle clubs are not living entirely unprepared and in a "fool's Paradise!” 755
There were also representations made against the freeze on membership in the House of Representatives (especially by Josiah Francis, MP, an AIF veteran of World War One) and in the Senate by Senator (former Major-General) Charles Henry Brand, who had set up the Citizen Forces Rifle Associations in NSW and Victoria. 756 The pressure told on the new Minister for Defence, Harold Victor Campbell Thorby, who in June 1938 stated that the ban might be lifted again in the 1938/39 estimates.757 By August, Merrett was looking to find ways to demonstrate that the rifle club movement was indeed pro-defence and pro-military in order to gain a more sympathetic support from the Minister and his military advisers for an increase in membership. In a circular to CCRAA members, Merrett even suggested ways in which the rifle clubs could be better utilised for defence:
755 Advertiser, 24 May 1938, p. 22. 756 For background on Francis, see J. Rees, 'Francis, Sir Josiah (1890 - 1964)', Australian Dictionary of Biography, Vol.14, Melbourne University Press, 1996, pp. 212-3. 757 For background on Thorby, see I. Carnell, 'Thorby, Harold Victor Campbell (1888 - 1973)', Australian Dictionary of Biography, Vol.12, Melbourne University Press, 1990, pp. 216-7. 8
From the remarks of …the Minister…where a rifle club is attached as a reserve to a military unit it should be possible to arrange for voluntary instruction to be given to members of the club attached to it. …it is suggested that …those up to the age of 45 to receive instruction in machine gun work and those over…in (a) First Aid, including gas attacks, and (b) in the duties of guards and sentries at posts such as bridges, waterworks, magazines, etc…in its fulfilment merely the evidence of a desire by members of such rifle clubs to take a necessary part in defence of the country.758
Not everyone agreed with Merrett’s approach; some rankled at giving the military even more control of rifle club activities. In November, even the CCRAA Treasurer, A.S. Spencer, felt that he needed to write to the press. In a letter to the Sydney Morning Herald in November 1938, he noted ‘that it will always be impossible to get the trained military man to see eye to eye with the civilian in matters of policy, conduct, and administration, as they affect rifle club activities.’ 759 Prolific letter-writer and now president of the Randwick Rifle Club, Richard Meredith Fox, expressed the view that the issue was bigger than the limits on membership: it was military control of the sport which was the issue. Fox stated that ‘Military domination in any respect least of all in sport will not be tolerated by our people and there is no doubt in the minds of riflemen that the sport is unduly hampered in this direction.’ He went on to complain about the ‘...set of almost archaic regulations which applied only to conditions prior to the advent of the civilian club and when the regimental clubs held sway and rifle shooting was the exclusive possession of the volunteer regiments.’ Fox added that ‘The enrolment form in use to-day is manifestly a survival dating back 35 years...In the light of our civilian status the oath which we take and administer to new members involves an anomaly and cannot be applied strictly speaking to civilians. It is purely and simply a military oath.’760
While this upsurge in criticism of the decision to freeze rifle clubs—from all viewpoints— continued, in June 1938 a British Staff Officer of Engineers, Lieutenant-General Ernest Ker
758 Report of the Commonwealth Council of Rifle Associations of Australia for the Year 1938, p. 16. 759 Sydney Morning Herald, 3 November 1938, p. 9. 760 Sydney Morning Herald, 25 May 1938, p. 12. 9
Squires, CB, DSO, MC, was appointed to the reinstated role of Inspector-General of the Australian Military Forces.761 The Government of the United Australia Party under Prime Minister Joseph Lyons subsequently began to announce a number of defence initiatives. In October 1938, the Defence Minister, Thorby, announced the raising of the establishment for militia from 35,000 to 70,000. This was roundly criticised however, as an announcement without a plan to implement it.762 However, while Militia numbers were set to rise, Thorby rejected the call for greater rifle club numbers.
In fact the Government had a plan to actually reduce rifle club membership—by placing a minimum and maximum age for members while increasing military control to form rifle clubs into units. The measures would include, said the Minister: ‘the training of selected rifle club members in the use of machine-guns. Other rifle club members will be enlisted in special guards for the protection of public utilities, oil tanks, bridges, and munition dumps.’763 In short, rifle clubs were to be integrated fully into the new concept of home defence. Thorby rubbed salt in already sensitive riflemen’s wounds when he stated that ‘an investigation had shown that many present club members were too old to be of value for military service.’764 Some commentators, however, supported the moves, as a letter to the editor of the Sydney Morning Herald noted:
Mr. Thorby should be commended on his action in an honest endeavour to place the rifle clubs on a sound and useful footing from a defence angle. As at present organised the average rifleman would be neither use nor ornament if it came to a showdown. Much of the paraphernalia he takes with him to the mound i.e., anti-nicol compound, Chinese white, lamp black etc., even the aperture sight would be of no use whatsoever on active service. 765
This letter led to a rebuke from the CCRAA Treasurer, A.S. Spencer, as well as a response from Randwick Rifle Club’s president, R.M. Fox:
761 Squires died in Australia in 1940. 762 Thorby became Minister for Public Works and Civil Aviation in November in a Cabinet re-shuffle. 763 Mercury, 2 November 1938, p. 11. 764 Argus, 27 October 1938, p. 2. 765 Sydney Morning Herald, 5 November 1938, p. 9. 10
Insistence on the conditions, as set out by the Minister, would simply bring about a reversion to the regimental rifle club type of formation, even if it does not eventually destroy the rifle club movement, as appears likely. The Regimental Rifle Club, of course, is a necessity as such, but the Civilian Rifle Club has largely superseded it, because of its greater elasticity and freedom from hard and-fast military conditions.
But, if it is difficult now to complete or maintain the complements of militia units even with the most alluring inducements of good pay, bright uniforms, and free technical training, it is much more difficult to expect that men who take up rifle shooting as a recreation and sport will find as much pleasure in it if military drills and training are superimposed… What an immense and stimulating consolation it would be to us, if at the inception of a national crisis, we could feel assured that every man, and woman, too, of our small population, could efficiently handle and use the service rifle… That objective, however, will not be realised under cast-iron military regulations, but only by the free development of rifle shooting as a national recreation and sport. 766
The annual report of the DRAC for mid-1938 noted that actual expenditure under the Rifle Clubs vote was only £100 more than for 1936/37, although the restoration of the free grant for small arms ammunition to the original entitlement of 200 rounds of Mark VII ammunition for each efficient member increased expenditure on ammunition by £14,000 to £29,000. As well, suddenly free issues of ammunition also increased by 1,246,384 to 8,874,289 rounds in 1936-7. The number of rifle club members, in 1,152 clubs, had dropped to 46,941, compared with 50,241 in the same period, and the number of rifle ranges had also dropped to 809, 25 less than the previous year. Regimental rifle clubs strength was 6,940. Demand for the short rifle with heavy barrel saw sales of 2,991, a total sale of 15,517 since the rifles were made available. In a sign that the economic times were changing for the better, the aggregate number of competitors at state rifle association prize meetings had increased by 746 and prize-money increased from £17,214 to £22,079.767
By October 1938, however, it was clear that there would be no increase in membership of rifle clubs, and the estimates would remain much as they had in 1937/38. A number of other issues were
766 Sydney Morning Herald, 29 October 1938, p. 5. 767 Mercury, 3 July 1939, p. 12. 11
further exacerbating the rapidly deteriorating relationship between the rifle club movement and the Department of Defence, which was rapidly dipping to an all-time low. There was resentment over the general treatment of and apparent disdain for, the civilian rifle clubs by the military. Merrett was trying desperately to appease the Military Board, which wanted greater and greater control of rifle clubs as Australia scrambled to re-arm. He was also trying to appease the rifle club movement leaders who were against increased military control while retaining the independence of the state rifle associations and the CCRAA itself.
By 1939, the military leadership in Australia had more than rifle clubs to consider as it tried to prepare Australia for what some saw as an inevitable national emergency for which Australia was dangerously under-prepared. The nation was short of every kind of defence stores, equipment, and weapons. On the one hand, all unnecessary expenditure—for example on rifle clubs—was to be avoided; on the other hand the 50,000 men in rifle clubs remained a factor in defence planning and the establishment of an Army reserve, whether the rifle clubs believed it to be so or not. The Government remained confident, in public at least, that the Royal Navy and Singapore could protect Australia in the event of war. In line with the ‘business as usual’ mantra, 1939 began with rifle clubs, district unions and State rifle associations continuing to operate as if nothing had changed. The time-honoured routine of rifle matches and prize-giving continued.768
In short, as World War Two drew closer, the Australian Government began to appreciate that it needed to prepare, and fast.769 Overall, however, Australia’s defences were woefully inadequate after years of neglect. Suffering from the restrictions in place, rifle club membership continued to fall, to
768 In May, the CCRAA even requested help from the Military Board to keep up the Australian Hut at Bisley. Report of the Commonwealth Council of Rifle Associations for the Year 1939, Keating-Wood Pty. Ltd., Melbourne, 1939, p. 14. In the meantime, Germany had breached the post-World War One Treaty of Versailles by occupying the Rhineland (1936) and Austria (1938). In March 1939, Germany also occupied the Sudetenland in Czechoslovakia, while Japan’s war in China continued. 769 At the Lithgow Small Arms Factory, frenetic activity began to prepare drawings and tool-up for the production of the new Bren Gun. Work force numbers began to rise slowly and rifle and Vickers machine-gun production also began to increase. T. Griffiths, Lithgow’s Small Arms Factory and its People, Vol.1, 1907-1950, pp. 246-54. 12
under 46,000 by June 1939.770 In August 1939 Germany joined Russia in a Non-Aggression Pact, and the Australian Government required all males between 18 and 64 to register with the Manpower Board. The Department of Defence asked the CCRAA, through the Military Board, to survey rifle clubs to determine what the level of cooperation was with Militia units. Simultaneously the Military District Headquarters were also requested to investigate the issue.771 In the 2nd Military District (NSW), for example, the 1st Cavalry Division asked its sub-units:
What progress had been made in the review of affiliations [with rifle clubs]?
To what extent have Commanding Officers of Militia Units made contact with their affiliated Rifle Clubs in respect of training, demonstrations etc.?
To what extent have members of Rifle Clubs attended training demonstrations, Regimental Classes or given assistance during matches or practices of the Militia Rifle Club Union?
How many members of affiliated Civilian Rifle Clubs joined Militia Units during 1938/39?
Have Executive officials been asked to render assistance for recruiting for the Militia and /or whether they will be available to perform similar service in time of war…and if so, what has been the response?’ 772
The answers were illuminating and indicated that affiliation of rifle clubs, let alone integration into Militia training, had not been a success. Typical was the response by the 24th Light Horse Regiment, based at Moree, which told its Brigade Headquarters that:
No Rifle Club has to-date been officially affiliated
No training demonstrations of interest to Rifle Club members have been held
Rifle Clubs have given every assistance asked for by Troop Leaders…[in] the form of loan of targets and in some cases of coaching of recruits in rifle shooting.
770 Advertiser, 21 June 1940, p. 10. 771 ‘Army Headquarters Memo 23128 of 27 July 1939’, NAA Sydney SP 1008, Item 411-4-696 (13). 772 ‘Memorandum 25098, 1st Cavalry Division to Divisional Units, dated 7 August 1939 - Rifle Clubs: Cooperation with Militia Forces’, NAA SP 1008,Item 411-4-691. 13
Nil [rifle club members joining Militia]. Many members of 24 L.H. have, since joining the Militia, become members of Rifle Clubs.
No. Matters of this nature… have been vested in Local Defence Committees. 773
At the outbreak of World War Two, the Government moved quickly and formally ordered the postponement of all State and District prize meetings and reduce ammunition supply to rifle clubs to 150 rounds per efficient member (no new ammunition to be available until after mid-June 1940). The Commonwealth Match series was postponed indefinitely. Restrictions on new rifle clubs and new members were likewise extended to regimental rifle clubs as well. 774 By October riflemen were under direct Defence orders:
to fire only the musketry course or give instruction to recruits or new members. In several country centres riflemen actively engaged with militia units in assisting with the musketry course—rifle clubs will soon have to conduct shooting matches in closer co-operation with the militia, and shooting with open sights in all practices over ranges up to 300 yards may be introduced. Machine gun instruction and shooting at service targets may also be included in the training of the rifleman.775
The CCRAA’s meeting of December 1939 had to be held at the VRA office in Melbourne City rather than at Victoria Barracks, which was fully occupied by Defence. The meeting was focused on responding to the Military Board’s interest in what the rifle club movement could do, other than straight rifle shooting, for the defence of the country. On behalf of NSW, A.S. Spencer declared:
If the Military Board desires riflemen to do certain things which, in its studied judgement, will make them a more efficient reserve unit, let those things be done, let us stand together, let us help each other, let us build on a foundation of mutual co-operation a superstructure which will truly reflect the best that can be done. 776
773 ‘Memo 24th Light Horse Regiment to 2nd Cavalry Brigade, dated 10 September 1939 - Rifle Clubs: Cooperation with Militia Forces’, NAA SP 1008, Item 411-4-696 (8). 774 Report of the Commonwealth Council of Rifle Associations for the Year 1939, pp. 12-13. 775 Advertiser, 13 October 1939, p. 7. 776 Report of the Commonwealth Council of Rifle Associations for the Year 1939, Keating-Wood Pty. Ltd., Melbourne, 1939, pp. 34-35. 14
A number of practical measures were put forward immediately. Tasmania’s delegate ‘felt that the Rifle Clubs were now in the period of their test, and unless we do something we may be asked, “What is the use of Rifle Clubs in view of the expense incurred in maintaining them?” ’ 777 The Council accordingly made a number of recommendations to the Military Board.778
Merrett finally reported, in January 1940, the progressive results of inquiries with rifle clubs with regard to their cooperation with the Militia and the newly raised 2nd Australian Imperial Force (2nd AIF): 779
Associations No of Enlistments Enlistments Assistance Attended clubs into militia into 2nd AIF to training parades or replied militia lectures NQRA 12 165 26 80 38 NRA of 136 851 90 259 433 NSW VRA 161 1083 173 663 468
When in late 1938, the Australian rifle club movement had 1,193 rifle clubs containing 50, 241 riflemen, these figures hardly reassured the Minister for Defence that the rifle club movement was enthusiastically embracing wartime circumstances, even considering not all rifle club men were fit for active service.780 At the same time the measures recommended to the Military Board in October were quickly being overtaken by events. The formation of the 2nd AIF in 1940 impacted the rifle clubs in much the same way as had the 1st AIF in 1914, but in 1940, the outcomes for rifle clubs would be more severe than in World War One and its immediate aftermath.
777 Report of the Commonwealth Council of Rifle Associations for the Year 1939, Keating-Wood Pty. Ltd., Melbourne, 1939, p. 37. 778 These included the introduction of a musketry course for rifle clubs, to be as fired in the army, 40 rounds with open sight and no sling, at service targets, that riflemen attached to units be given opportunity for training with automatic weapons, that rifle clubs outside unit areas be asked to do 30 minutes elementary squad drill rifle exercises and field signals on rifle practice days, that when possible a Bren gun be allotted to the rifle clubs in each State and that the development of suitable rifle club members as snipers be favoured. ibid. 779 Report of the Commonwealth Council of Rifle Associations for the Year 1939, p. 6. 780 Report of the Commonwealth Council of Rifle Associations of Australia for the year 1938, CCRAA, Melbourne, 1939, p. 11. 15
At the beginning of 1940 rifle clubs continued to shoot (albeit with dwindling ammunition stocks), some efforts were made by the State rifle associations to integrate musketry training with militia units and to provide instruction for men eligible to enlist, prompting John Samuel Eastmon, the Secretary of the NRA of Western Australia, to note that: ‘Training men to shoot is definitely one that must be given attention. Without training, it is appalling how rotten shooting can be, and every good war general wants to see efficiency with the rifle.’ 781 With government restrictions on numbers still in place, membership applications for rifle clubs did not see the rapid build-up as had been experienced in World War One as the threat seemed far away, the European war seemed quiet, and so many men were waiting to see what developed. The Government, too, seemed far less decisive than in 1914. Certainly there did not appear to be any more enthusiasm for training in drill than there was at the outbreak of World War One.
In February 1940 an extra 50 rounds of free ammunition was released to ‘efficients’; it appeared that the Military Board recognised that if military-like training was to occur, more ammunition was required.782 By June 1940 the Government still seemed unable to mobilise the rifle clubs properly or use their available manpower or skills to good effect, at least not in an organised way, probably because the Government was overwhelmed by the huge additional workload that re-armament imposed or, more likely, that the rifle club movement was simply a very low priority for the Government at this time. In fact the scene had become even more complicated by the Government’s acceptance of an offer by the Returned Sailors and Soldiers Imperial League of Australia (RSSILA) to form a new reserve for Home Defence.783 Many riflemen complained that they were not being utilised in the defence of Australia.
781 West Australian, 21 June 1940, p. 10. 782 Advertiser, 15 February 1940, p. 13. However, the Military Board also disagreed with the CCRAA recommendations for an expansion of miniature rifle shooting facilities by issuing service rifles with .22 calibre barrels and ammunition. As a result, this measure dashed the hopes of some who thought it was a critical measure just to hold the rifle clubs together through the war. West Australian, 16 May 1940, p. 6. 783 The RSSILA changed its name in November 1940 to ‘The Returned Sailors' Soldiers' and Airmen’s Imperial League of Australia’ (RSSAILA). 16
The CCRAA Treasurer, A.S. Spencer, wrote to the Sydney Morning Herald, drawing upon a speech by the Prime Minister to conclude, incorrectly as it was to turn out, that rifle club men would be used as a reserve:
Rifle club members are definitely reserves to the militia forces... from the Prime Minister’s broadcast address on June 16, Mr. Menzies said: “Our local defence so far as land forces are concerned will depend on an aggregation of our permanent forces, our militia, our garrison battalions (entirely made up of returned soldiers), our militia reserves, the new class ‘A’ reserve being constituted by the Returned Soldiers League, the AIF in Australia and such further drafts of universal trainees or of volunteers as we may create or call for. 784
Even if it had been the Government’s intention to mobilise rifle club men, the rapidly evolving situation meant plans had to be adjusted accordingly as the Government came to realise that it simply did not have the resources to supply, train and lead all of these forces. The SARA even declared that a Rifle Defence Corps should be formed to complement the proposed Returned Soldiers Defence Corps, which became known as the Volunteer Defence Corps or VDC.785 Something had to give. On 20 August 1940 the Military Board ordered rifle club members to enlist in either the AIF, the Australian Military Forces (AMF – the Militia), or the new VDC. If they were unable to do so, they should carry out training as directed by the state rifle associations.786 The state [rifle] associations in Western Australia, South Australia, Tasmania and NSW took this to heart and ‘started off with great enthusiasm, but no action was taken in Queensland, whilst the [VRA] was directed to wait until it received orders – which were never issued.’ Western Australia and South Australia began actively enrolling men into their clubs. They soon exceeded their quota, while using
‘improvised equipment and rifles’ and printing their own drill and musketry books. 787 Meanwhile, the Government re-issued orders that authorised membership of rifle clubs was not to be exceeded.
784 Sydney Morning Herald, 28 June 1940, p. 4. 785 As late as September calls were still being made for a separate Rifle Defence Corps in several states. But the momentum gathering behind training in rifle clubs had been overtaken by events. 786 Report of the Commonwealth Council of the Rifle Associations of Australia for the years 1941, 1942, 1943, CCRAA, Melbourne, 1944, p. 9. 787 ibid. 17
Riflemen began to join the AIF, AMF or VDC as the ammunition shortages and cessation of some club, and all union and association matches, began to take full effect.788 Yet even by December 1940 the new VDC was barely functioning and the rifle clubs continued to remain extant as illustrated in a letter from a VDC platoon commander to the Advertiser, accusing his organisation of ‘a lack of imagination’:
It is five months since members of the RSL began training in the Volunteer Defence Corps. …7,500 are enrolled …but the organisation leaves much to be desired. No rational programme has been laid down for the guidance of centres. Refresher courses have been held for officers and NCO's [non-commissioned officers] but it was left to the initiative of the [SARA] to print a booklet on squad drill and musketry training. Yet the rifle clubs are only admitted in the Defence Corps as a sort of semi-detached unit. No proper syllabus of training, except of a most elementary character, has been issued. Many centres are having only one parade of l½ hours a week, doing chocolate soldier stuff— with an occasional lecture.’ 789
The bombshell finally landed in mid-1941. In June, the CCRAA Chairman Merrett was informed that the intention of the Government was to place the rifle clubs in recess for the duration of the war. In a circular to members of the CCRAA on 9 June 1941, Merrett explained the unfolding situation:
The Government having decided to form a [VDC], many Returned Soldiers joined up, but the authorised establishment of that body has not yet been reached, and members of Rifle Clubs are now eligible to become members of it. It is obvious that there cannot be several organisations doing the same work, and to get the best result it is necessary to have one which is duly authorised and under Military control, and available to those who desire to serve.
When therefore the question of utilising the services of the Rifle Clubs arose, it seemed that if their members could link up with the [VDC] – but still retain their present membership of their Rifle Club – it would be a means of maintaining the rifle club movement, which would spring into activity again when the cessation of the War permitted it... 790
Merrett was powerless to stop this action by the Government, motivated as it was by the need to bring some order into the chaos that was developing through competing claims to organisational
788 However, even by September 1941 numbers were not high; only 5,441 had enlisted for example, in the VDC. ‘Telegram from Assistant Secretary, Department of the Army to Secretary Department of the Army, 18 September 1941’, MP/508/1, NAA. 789 Advertiser, 11 December 1940, p. 18. 790 Report of the Commonwealth Council of Rifle Associations for the Years 1941, 1942, 1943, pp. 10-1. 18
primacy in home defence. This must have been a low point indeed for Merrett and the other leaders of the rifle club movement. There is no doubt that successive Australian Governments, culminating in the Menzies Government, had failed almost entirely to prepare Australia for possible war, despite belated rearmament in the late 1930s. This included, from the rifle club perspective, limiting the rifle club movement’s funding and modern rifles, and preventing its expansion due to the Government’s own financial constraints. In fact the military may well have recognised early in the war that the rifle clubs were actually incapable of providing it with the trained reserve it sought and quickly accepted the offer of a VDC to provide a military body which it could do something with.
The CCRAA and the State rifle associations, on the other hand, while endlessly reminding all and sundry how important the rifle club movement was as a vital component of Australia’s defence system and repeatedly asking for more resources to show that it was, had shown itself unable to control its own clubs towards this end. The rifle clubs, by and large, resisted attempts by both the associations and the military to develop their activities along more formal military lines. The clubs were formally under military control and the military, as had always been the case, saw the rifle clubs as a cheap but unrealized resource pool for defence. It was no surprise however, that many in the general public were unhappy at the disbandment, including the editor of the Argus, who stated in December 1941 that that ‘when the Federal Government disbanded the 1,150 rifle clubs established in every part of the Commonwealth, and then impressed all service rifles, they completely immobilised a great guerilla army in Australia.’ 791
Evidently, while the leadership of the associations, including that of the CCRAA—dominated as they were by former Volunteer or Militia officers and returned soldiers among its elected councillors, and by the military among its appointed councillors—no doubt felt strongly about the need to fit in with military plans, it seems that many ordinary riflemen in clubs did not agree. They had become used to a certain amount of autonomy in running their own affairs since the 1920s, and did not join
791 Argus, 27 December 1941, p. 4. 19
rifle clubs to become pseudo-soldiers but rather to enjoy target practice in a social setting. This, despite the acceptance of continuing financial and other support from the taxpayer. In common with volunteer organisations everywhere, when it came to the actual implementation of rifle training as stipulated by the military in 1940, men stepped forward from among the members to implement it, but the vast majority of those who had not by this time enlisted did not, probably viewing such training as onerous and unnecessary for them. Rifle clubs had become used to Government support and assistance, but were not able or willing to see the quid pro quo expected of that support.
By mid-1941, between 6,000 and 7,000 members of rifle clubs had joined the 2nd AIF, another 1,481 were on full-time duty and 3,100 on part-time duty [in the Australian Military Forces— Australian service only]; while 5,780 had joined the VDC.792 This was a bit more than a third of rifle club members at that time. By September 1941 the DRAC, by now Colonel George Francis Murphy, was also the Director of the VDC.793 All rifle association, union and club funds were returned to Government Trust Funds established for the purpose, and initially, rifles on loan to clubs were recalled.
Before the year was out however, most of the 32,000 rifles which were owned by rifle club members were also impressed.794 In Australia, rifle club members who had joined the VDC were then reissued rifles, but never their own. When grants to rifle clubs other than for rifle range rentals were halted in 1941, Merrett appealed to the Military Board to continue at least grants to the rifle associations (which did not go into recess) and this was given, albeit at a lower rate. The Military
792 Report of the Commonwealth Council of Rifle Associations for the Years 1941, 1942, 1943, p. 16. 793 Murphy served as Director of the VDC and DRAC until November 1942. For Murphy’s career, see L.B. Swifte, 'Murphy, George Francis (1883 - 1962)', Australian Dictionary of Biography, Vol.10, Melbourne University Press, 1986, pp. 635-6. 794 The Government was critically short of rifles for the Army, especially after it had sent a number to Britain to support it after the evacuation from Dunkirk in 1940, in which the defeated British Army had lost tens of thousands of its rifles. 20
Board subsequently also attempted to deny payment to employed rifle association secretaries, but Merrett was able to convince it not to proceed.795
Before 1941, the rifle club movement was robust and pleading for approval to increase the number of its clubs and members. When the CCRAA asked for more funds, the opposite happened, ammunition was cut and various restrictions placed on rifle club growth. Although allotted to Militia units, they were largely ignored by the military in terms of incorporation into military training programs for the Militia.796 When they asked for training in machine-guns, for example, they were told that there was not enough ammunition. At the outbreak of war, their rifles were impressed and rifle club members, or what was left after enlistments into the active forces, were effectively pushed into the VDC. In effect, the rifle clubs with their trained body of men were scrapped (‘placed in recess’) while a new body, the VDC, came into existence with veterans from World War One at its core, as explained in this chapter. For the rest of the war, the rifle club movement, represented by the leadership in the CCRAA and the State rifle associations, was by any measure, effectively moribund.797
It was only natural that, given this treatment on the one hand, and the character, experience and intelligence of the men in the leadership positions of the rifle club movement at that time, that they finally began to question—as others had before them—how to deal with this situation and how to face the future. For the leaders in particular, with their background of active military service and a lifetime of connection with the military and defence ethos, being sidelined came as a real shock. For years, if not decades, the leadership of the rifle club movement had tried to accommodate the military. But despite the individual military officers and men who privately and less often, publicly, sided with the aspirations and culture of the rifle club movement, the reality was that the essential contradiction between civilian rifle shooting—despite its traditional roots in the Volunteer and
795 Report of the Commonwealth Council of the Rifle Associations of Australia for the years 1941, 1942, 1943, CCRAA, Melbourne, 1944, pp. 20-21. 796 As seen by the responses to the questions raised on this very issue in 1939 in the NSW military district. 797 A full meeting of the CCRAA would not take place until April, 1947. 21
militia—and military which had developed inexorably since the late 19th century, was stronger than ever. The leadership of the rifle club movement, moreover, seemed to be increasingly out of step with the rifle clubs themselves, many of which were happy to be independent of military control. Just as had occurred before World War One, preparations for the possibility of another war after 1935 did nothing to engender more respect or trust by the military in the efficacy of the rifle club movement as an effective reserve.
The sidelining once again of the rifle club movement in 1940-41 was another shock, perhaps even more so than in 1914 or in 1920, to riflemen everywhere, not least in the national and State associations. The shock was perhaps made even greater by the fact that this did not occur after a general war, but right at the time when Australia’s defences were at their weakest point since, and it seemed that Australia itself could actually be invaded. To be rejected once again by the very Defence system that the rifle club movement felt was its natural and traditional ‘parent’ and sponsor, was a blow from which the rifle club movement never fully recovered. While the former military men who mostly ran the national and State organisations had tried to show that they were responsible members of the Defence establishment, in fact decades of actual divergence from Defence ideals and mutual antipathy had also eroded mutual respect between the Military and the rifle club movement. The rise of the civilian rifle clubs, with their focus on target shooting for sport and money prizes which had begun in the late 19th century, had reached its natural conclusion.
22
Conclusion
The rifle club movement was interconnected with the idea that the colonies of Australia (and then the new nation) should be able to contribute to their own defence, if not actually defend themselves against threats both real and imagined. Although the British Imperial garrisons in Australia did not leave until 1870, and the Royal Navy squadron on the ‘Australia station’ until 1913, military volunteerism was already well-established in the colonies before 1870. The first rifle club in Australia was recorded in Sydney in 1845, so it is no surprise that volunteer musketry and the pastime of target practice grew side-by-side.
In terms of organisation, the formation of Australian colonial rifle associations from 1860 went alongside the first formal wave of volunteer units formed by colonists at around the same time. There had been rifle clubs and Volunteer units in existence (often in co-existence) from the early 1850s. However, it was the surge in the Volunteer movement in England due to a war-scare with the French which led to a similar increase in the numbers of Volunteers in the colonies. It was this effect which gave rifle clubs their first organisational basis. The associations however, were at their best arranging annual matches for Volunteers; they did not actually control Volunteer units or later, civilian rifle clubs, themselves.
Most of the ‘rifle clubs’ at this time were military in nature and purpose and often were comprised of the same men who made up the local Volunteer units. The social nature and amateur status of many Volunteer units meant that they operated as de facto rifle clubs in any case. The evolution of the colonial rifle associations which were formed to support the musketry of the volunteer units, and which were controlled and led by Volunteer officers, reflected the symbiosis between the two main functions of the citizen soldiers of the time—musketry and drill. Musketry took precedence, with annual prize shoots arranged by the associations meeting the standard musketry skill requirements of the Volunteer units under their Imperial instructors.
1
By the 1870s, having survived the waxing and waning of financial and material support from their respective colonial governments as periodic war scares came and went, the rifle associations grew in strength and numbers. Despite having to move their rifle ranges further out from city population centres, the associations were able to offer richer prizes to the Volunteers in their annual rifle matches, which in turn started to break down the purely military intent of the associations as first formed. In fact by 1870 the first civilian rifle clubs began to make their appearances at the annual meetings, even though restricted to only a few matches.
In the period between 1870 and mid-1885, two important trends became evident. On one hand, increased concern and effort was being expended on defence matters. Increasingly, professional and Volunteer officers, and their masters in the colonial Parliaments, began to consider— forced in large part by the withdrawal of the Imperial garrisons—how best to defend their individual colonies if faced with hostile threats. This led to a series of defence reviews by Imperial experts and these in turn led to changes to the defence postures of the colonies. The effect on the rifle club movement was not uniform by any means. On the other hand the rifle associations began to be squeezed between their need for income, and their own aims of supporting Volunteer musketry. This situation was exacerbated with the introduction of partially-paid Militias in colonies from the mid-1880s. Again, the impact on, and response to, these developments by the rifle associations across the colonies was not uniform.
In 1883 Victoria created a Defence Department with its own Minister, while Queensland and Tasmania spent more on Defence than before, but as little as possible all the same. While Volunteer units continued in some form or other, principally in those colonies which wanted to spend the least, the larger colonies like Victoria and NSW, or the more ‘militarised’ colonies, like South Australia, developed robust partially-paid militias and coastal fortifications. Victoria’s defences developed around Port Phillip Bay became so formidable that they were referred to as the ‘Gibraltar of the South’. Within this context of increasing expenditure on defence, the intersection of the
2
changing defence infrastructure and needs with the changing nature of the rifle associations as they saw growing numbers of civilian rifle clubs, became more conflicted.
For the rifle associations, a series of intercolonial military rifle matches between Volunteers had been underway since 1873. Volunteers from Victoria had travelled to Wimbledon the home of the British National Rifle Association, in 1876 and were later joined in the USA for matches there by Volunteers from NSW. In 1887 the first all-Australian team of Volunteers travelled to England to compete in the annual matches. Volunteer officers or former Volunteer officers now in Militia units still dominated the rifle associations. However, with the sanctioning of civilian rifle clubs in the colonies, especially in Victoria, by their governments and military departments, and the growing international profile and status given to rifle shooting, civilian rifle clubs began to boom in numbers.
In part, this was also due to the fact that many Volunteers did not automatically move to enlist in the Militia in the mid-1880s as they saw that it meant having to drill, more like real soldiers. Many of these men however, did want to keep up with their rifle shooting, and so joined the increasing number of civilian rifle clubs. In turn this swell in numbers saw civilian rifle clubs gaining seats on rifle association councils as well as influencing the types of matches being shot and the prizes being offered in the annual matches managed by the rifle associations.798
Paradoxically, it was at this very period that the military began to view rifle clubs as increasing important, and cheap, potential military assets, filled with men who could at least shoot, many armed with the latest service rifles courtesy of supportive governments, and amenable to the aims and aspirations of the defence community, albeit a community dominated by Militia. In Victoria, these assets were actively mined to create two large new Volunteer corps, namely the Victorian Mounted Rifles and Victorian Rangers, while in other colonies like South Australia and NSW, rifle
798 The first civilian member on the national council did not appear until 1894, whereas by contrast, the VRA had four civilian rifle club members of its council by then and had had a civilian member on council from 1870. The Mercury, 20 December 1894, p. 2 and Victorian Rifle Association Official Programme and Scoring Book, 34th Meeting, November 1894, npn, np, Melbourne, 1894. 3
clubs were expected to become more involved with their Militia counterparts, both in training and conduct of rifle shooting matches ‘under service conditions’.
By 1888, when the rifle associations finally came together and formed a national council, their collective leadership was in no doubt that they were joined to the defence forces as a reserve force of some kind (still undefined by statute or regulation). The rifle associations were supported by their respective colonial governments with various grants and by the military with free issues of ammunition and use of service rifles and military ranges. In return the military advisors to the governments asked for more control over the rifle clubs and their operations. This push for more control was led officers in various colonies, most notably by Major General Edward Hutton and then Major General George French in NSW, and followed intercolonial military conferences from the early 1890s. However, at the working end of this relationship there was a growing conflict between the military goals on one side and the rifle clubs on the other.
This conflict was, at its simplest, driven by a growing disdain by the expert, mostly civilian, rifle club men for the part-time, Militia men. This disdain was reciprocated by the Militia who considered the rifle club men as ‘pot-hunters’. While the rifle club riflemen consistently outshot the Militia at standing long range targets on the rifle range, the military officers were increasing frustrated that the rifle club men did not, or would not, concede that for military purposes it was important that men drilled to learn how to manoeuvre on a battlefield. In most circumstances, aimed individual fire was less important to the military than massed fire brought to bear on the right point by manoeuvre.
This difference in approach manifested itself in various ways as Federation approached. Just as the military were insisting that in return for grants and ammunition the rifle clubs should act more like military units and shoot and drill on the rifle range as if they were in the field—with matches reflecting conditions in the field such as fire and movement, volley firing and disappearing or moving targets—the rifle clubs were moving inexorably towards even more long range target shooting at fixed ranges with bigger cash prizes. Moreover, just as the rifle associations were under even more 4
pressure by the military to conform to their wishes, the membership of the associations had continued to evolve in favour of more and more civilian clubs and a more independent attitude. This was especially so in Victoria where the civilian clubs had more than recovered from the recruitment among them for Volunteer units in the 1880s.
Exacerbating the divisions between the military ethos and the rifle clubs was the advent of the Boer War (1899-1901). The early successes of mounted and mobile expert farmer rifle shots in the Boer ranks against the regular British Army units seemed to confirm the rifle club view that rifle club men would not need to drill to be effective, and the fact that the colonial forces used the same type of irregulars and mounted riflemen against the Boers with equal success seemed to further vindicate this view. By this time, the rifle associations and their national council were in general united by the need to maintain incomes against parsimonious governments and tightening defence requirements. This meant that they could not ignore their true constituency, the civilian rifle clubs, which wanted to shoot only for monetary prizes or trophies. At the same time, the associations very much also needed to keep the military on-side to guarantee continued access to grants, ammunition and intra- and inter-colonial train travel concessions.
From the advent of Federation in 1901 to 1911 a new situation developed, affecting both the Army and rifle clubs. From the 1880s to Federation, Australia’s colonies had not faced a real threat of invasion or attack. Hence the posture of the colonial forces and fixed defences for self-defence, was not tested. As a result, the real question of whether and how rifle clubs would work together with the military defences was also never tested. But with the appointment of Major-General Edward Hutton as the first Commander-in-Chief of the Australian defence forces, the outlook on defence began to change. While unofficial Volunteers from Australia had served in the New Zealand wars and small forces had been sent by the colonies to support the Empire in the Sudan and the Boxer Rebellion, the colonies and then Australia had subsequently sent much larger forces to South Africa to operate alongside and part of the British Army in the field.
5
For the senior British Army officers on secondment, shaping defences in colonies like Australia was conducted in the context of how best the colonial forces could support the Empire. Britain’s defence and political establishment felt increasingly threatened by the imperial ambitions of Germany on the one hand and Japan on the other. Britain made an ally of Japan in 1902, but Japan’s victory over the Russians in 1904-05 made Australians increasing nervous in their turn about Japan. One way or the other, Britain started to look for what assets might be forthcoming from its colonies in time of a general war, while at home in Australia there was growing support for the development of stronger Australian forces on land and sea. For the Imperial officers like Hutton, these forces were seen as Empire assets.
By 1904, then, the rifle club movement, at its strongest in Victoria with over 20,000 men in rifle clubs, began to come under real pressure to conform with the structuring of the new Australian Army under Hutton’s direction, while formally coming under the new Defence Act for the first time. This had immediate ramifications. First of all rifle club men had to swear the oath of allegiance and come under military discipline in so far as forming a third line of Reserves behind the small permanent forces and the second line of Militia units. Riflemen had to qualify for their ammunition grants and travel concessions by meeting the musketry course requirements set out for them. Rifle club captains were seen as officers, and rifle clubs did not get efficiency grants unless their riflemen qualified each year.
By 1911, universal military training was in full swing around Australia, with rifle clubs tied to Militia units and expected to supply manpower to bring those Militia units up to strength in time of emergency. The secretaries of both the Victorian and NSW associations were Area Officers with honorary military ranks of captain, responsible for recruiting, training and administration of militia units in their areas. By this time Hutton was long gone, but so were many of the old guard of ex- Volunteer officers who had controlled the associations for so long. Instead, the associations were now stacked with Militia officers and controlled by the military. However, Hutton and his successors had not been able to succeed in eliminating the independence and even anti-military attitudes of 6
many riflemen in clubs. Their antipathy to drill and soldiering was still so strong by 1913 that the Defence Department’s Director of Rifle Associations and Clubs felt compelled to state to Parliament in his first formal report that Australia had a Militia that could drill but not shoot and a rifle club movement which could shoot but not drill.
With the outbreak of World War One, this situation was exactly why the rifle clubs, with over 80,000 men in formed units, were completely by-passed by the Defence Department. Defence recognised the weaknesses of the movement for what they were and concluded that the domestic, socially orientated rifle club structure—despite its theoretical military value—could be more of a hindrance than a help in forming and despatching an expeditionary force, the AIF, to Europe. So the rifle clubs, as formed units, took no part in the war in any meaningful way. Although numbers in rifle clubs in Australia grew to an astonishing 118,000 by 1917, its fit and able members enlisted in the AIF, as individuals. By the end of the war, while thousands of rifle club men had been killed or wounded, this did little to change the professional military officer’s view of the worth of rifle clubs, especially in the era of mass industrialised warfare that came to characterise fighting by the end of the war.
In 1920 a Military Committee composed of the most senior Australian generals of the war recommended to Government that the movement be scrapped altogether, in such low esteem did they hold the movement. While the rifle associations and clubs complained to their political connections—there were rifle clubs in almost every electoral district in Australia—they only gained a reprieve, to come under the civilian side of defence, not the Military, for control and administration. At a time when defence chiefs were facing severe budget restrictions following World War One, this was a not unhappy compromise for Army. However, the situation only got worse for defence with regard to restrictions as successive Governments made more and more cuts to defence and the defence forces continued to shrink. For the rifle club movement, on the other hand, despite a more austere Government funding than before the war, it was almost business as usual.
7
Despite the rejection of the rifle club movement by Defence, the leaders of the now Commonwealth Council of Rifle Associations (CCRAA) remained convinced that their best path to maintaining the status quo was to remain as part of the military establishment. It made a determined effort to find ways to re-ingratiate itself with the military establishment, aided by the continued dominance of State associations by military officers despite the change of status in administration. With the Great Depression from late 1929, a reason for re-amalgamating with the Army—economies of scale—allowed the rifle club movement to convince the Army and the Government in 1931 to re- unite it under Army once again. Subsequently, through the 1930s the rifle club movement clung closely to the military, always hoping that the movement would be recognised as the valuable military adjunct to defence that the leaders of the rifle club movement all thought it to be.
The reality was that after the Military Committee recommendations of 1920 nothing would be the same again. For a generation of riflemen who were already members or who had joined clubs during World War One, but not gone overseas (the vast majority), or who had joined after the war, it was natural that their connection with and reliance on the Military in the decade after the war weakened even more. The national council leadership still consisted of the old guard who had been there since 1904, and now 30 years on could not come to grips with the change of circumstances. Many of the same issues and antagonisms with the military remained, as did the question that in event of war, were rifle clubs a help or a hindrance? While individual riflemen could be supremely confident of their ability as marksmen, the reality is that the changed nature of war meant that the impact and efficacy of individual riflemen on the battlefield was smaller than ever.
With World War Two, with the closer threat of possible invasion by the traditional ‘enemy’, the Japanese, once again the Government and Defence establishment opted to form a new expeditionary force—the 2nd AIF—and form a new domestic military organisation, the Volunteer Defence Corps, as Australia’s response to this new situation. Once again the rifle club movement was sidelined. This time, however, it was sidelined for eight years. Its rifles were sequestered and all
8
club activities ceased until 1948. Once again individuals either joined the AIF or, this time, the VDC.
Looking back at the developments and evolution of the rifle club movement and its links with the Defence Forces of Australia, it is hard not to draw the conclusion that Hutton was entirely on the right track in trying to force the rifle club movement into military conformity during 1902-1904. The movement, with its tens of thousands of rifle enthusiasts right around the country, did constitute a quite useful military reserve, but only if it could be made to conform. The failure of the military leadership to bring the rifle clubs to heel was mainly due to the failure to recognise that the rifle associations could not and did not control the rifle clubs. The rifle clubs had become in the main highly civilianised at the very time that the military establishment wanted the clubs to become a formal part of the defence structure.
Just as the Volunteers of the 1880s had failed to provide the more effective forces required for a higher standard of defence by 1884, so it was with the rifle clubs in the period following to 1914. The paradox for the rifle club movement was that the national and State associations remained dominated by pro-military and actual military officers, while the inverse was happening at the rifle club level. With Federation came a great opportunity, to hive off the civilian rifle clubs to stand alone as clubs for the pursuit of target shooting, but with no Government grants, no free ammunition, and no military ranges or range officers to support them. Ploughing these resources into military or regimental rifle clubs at that time would have brought the rifle club movement back to its origins and singular purpose—to support the musketry skills of the defence forces. But the opportunity was not recognised and the moment was lost.
Instead, the political clout of the rifle clubs was able to hold sway. The military establishment, frustrated that the rifle clubs would not become more militarised despite the rhetoric of the associations and the best carrot and stick approaches by Hutton and his successors, turned its back on the rifle club movement when World War One broke out. The older leaders of the Association, 9
pining for recognition, rejected by Army in 1920, and tied to tradition and habit, almost counter- intuitively worked assiduously after the war to bring the movement back under Army’s control. They eventually succeeded in 1931, but once again it was not really what the clubs themselves wanted, used as they were more than ever to their independence from the military. This was born out by the letters to the press by old rifle club hands deploring the dead hand of the Military being re-imposed on the rifle clubs—as they saw it. The failure of the rifle clubs subsequently to enthusiastically embrace the Military training requirements gave further evidence that on the whole, it was the leadership of the rifle club movement but not the rank and file in the clubs themselves, who wanted to return to the Military home.
The chance to make changes had come just after Federation. But the size of the challenges facing Hutton and the small cadre of professionals in charge of forming a new Australian Army and the politicians groping their way to a new defence paradigm for Australia saw the rifle club movement slip away to their rifle ranges and traditional matches, largely overlooked in the greater scheme of things. The professional military always underestimated the power of the rifle clubs to work hard at maintaining the status quo. An entitlement culture had developed in the colonial period and entitlements like free ammunition and cash grants were habits hard to break. While the rifle clubs were, in some respects, fortunate that they were not among the biggest issues to be tackled in the period before World War One, they also had no-one to blame but themselves when the military failed to use them at the times of Australia’s greatest challenges in two world wars.
While it is easy to speculate as to what might have happened or could have happened, to make the rifle club movement a real adjunct to defence after Federation, it must be remembered that it had, in the various colonies in which it operated and for the first twenty five years at least of its existence since 1860, been exactly that. The Victorians, for example, had used the movement successfully from 1885 to create two useful Volunteer corps. But as soon as the military challenge became one of supporting the Empire in time of war and not merely defending Australian soil, everything changed. The rifle club movement with its entrenched focus on individual target 10
shooting at long distances, had already evolved past the point of a useful military return, despite the wants of its national and State leadership, and so the movement was unable to adapt accordingly. When it came down to it, there was not the appetite by the military authorities to take on the rifle clubs in defiance of their political influence and create a new structure which could actively and actually support the military after Federation. It was an outcome which could have been very different, but the widening gap between the aspirations of the rifle club movement leadership at the national level, and the aspirations of the rifle club men at the local level, could not be reconciled with the needs and objectives of the military. The origins of the inevitable demise of the rifle club movement in 1941 lay in its 19th century evolution.
11
ANNEX A – Abbreviations
AAMC – Australian Army Medical Corps AAOC – Australian Army Ordnance Corps ACT – Australian Capital Territory AIF – Australian Imperial Force AIR – Australian Infantry Regiment AMF – Australian Military Forces ANA – Australian Natives Association AN&MEF – Australian Naval & Military Expeditionary Force ASC – Army Service Corps CB – Companion of the Most Honourable Order of the Bath CBE – Commander of the British Empire (civil or military division) CCRAA – Commonwealth Council of Rifle Associations of Australia CGS – Chief of the General Staff CI – Chief Instructor C-in-C – Commander-in-Chief CMF – Commonwealth Military Forces also Citizen Military Forces CMG – Commander of the Order of St. Michael and St. George DAAG – Deputy Assistant Adjutant-General DCM – Distinguished Conduct Medal DRA – District Rifle Association DRA & C – Director of Rifle Associations and Clubs DRC – Director of Rifle Clubs DSO – Distinguished Service Order ED – Efficiency Decoration ex officio – appointed by virtue of position, not elected GOC – General Officer Commanding KCB – Knight Commander of the Order of the Bath KB – Knight Companion of the Order of the Bath KBE – Knight Commander of the Order of the British Empire KCMG – Knight Commander of the Order of St. Michael and St. George Kt. – Knight MBE – Member of the British Empire MC – Military Cross MDRU/A – Metropolitan District Rifle Union or Association MHR – Member of the House of Representatives MLC – Member of the Legislative Assembly MP – Member of Parliament MSM – Meritorious Service Medal MVO – Member of the Royal Order of Victoria 12
NRA of GB – National Rifle Association of Great Britain NRAA – National Rifle Association of Australia NSW– New South Wales NSWRA – New South Wales Rifle Association NQRA – North Queensland Rifle Association NZ – New Zealand OBE – Order of the British Empire OCS – Officer Cadet School OTU – Officer Training Unit PMF – Permanent Military Forces QDF – Queensland Defence Force QMI – Queensland Mounted Infantry QRA – Queensland Rifle Association RA – Royal Artillery RAA – Royal Australian Artillery RAAF – Royal Australian Air Force RAE – Royal Australian Engineers RAN – Royal Australian Navy RE – Royal Engineers RMC – Royal Military College RSM – Regimental Sergeant Major RSSILA – Returned Soldiers and Sailors Imperial League of Australia (RSL) SA – South Australia SAMF – South Australian Military Forces SAMR – South Australian Mounted Rifles SANRA – South Australian National Rifle Association SARA – South Australian Rifle Association SQRA – Southern Queensland Rifle Association TRA – Tasmanian Rifle Association VD – Volunteer Decoration VDC – Volunteer Defence Corps VMF – Victorian Military Forces VMR – Victorian Mounted Rifles VPS – Victorian Public Service VRA – Victorian Rifle Association WA – Western Australia WARA – Western Australia Rifle Association
13
ANNEX B – Rifle club movement peak bodies nominated office bearers and delegates 1888-1941799
General Council of Rifle Associations of Australasia: 1888-1892
President: Colonel John Soame Richardson Feb.1888 Colonel William Vincent Legge Dec.1888 Major-General Alexander Bruce Tulloch, CB 1889 No meeting 1890 Major-General Major Francis Downes CMG 1891 Major-General J S Richardson, CB 1892
Vice-President: Major John George Davies Feb.1888 Lieutenant-Colonel John Montgomery Templeton Dec.1888 -1889 No meeting 1890 Lieutenant-Colonel Theodore James Jaques (absent) 1891 Major William Frederick Longfield 1892
Secretary & Treasurer: Captain George Henry Dean Feb.1888 - 1892
Delegates: New South Wales Major W F Longfield Feb.1888 Commander Alfred James Lewington Feb.1888 Major Philip Bingsley Walker Dec.1888 Lieutenant William Foskett Dec.1888 No delegates 1889 No meeting 1890 No delegates 1891 Major George Bagot Stack 1892 Lieutenant William James Norman Oldershaw 1892
Victoria Lieutenant Colonel J M Templeton Feb.1888 - 1889 Captain William Henry Powell Feb./Dec. 1888
799 Drawn from Kilsby, A.J., The Riflemen: A History of the National Rifle Association of Australia 1888-1988, Longueville Media, Sydney, 2013, pp.216-230 14
Major Nicholas William Kelly 1889 and 1892 No meeting 1890 Lieutenant-Colonel Fitzroy Somerset Lanyon Penno 1891-1892 Lieutenant Joseph Herbert Eales 1891 Captain John James Hanby – as visitor 1891 Lieutenant J H Eales – as visitor 1892
South Australia Captain G H Dean Feb.1888 -1892 Captain John William Castine Feb.1888 Captain David Drysdale Dec.1888 Lieutenant-Colonel Frank Makin 1889 and 1891 No meeting 1890 Captain Heinrich Oscar Esselbach 1892
Queensland Major Andrew Joseph Thynne Feb.1888 Senior Constable George Bain Feb.1888 Frank Stanley Shepherdson 1889 No Meeting 1890 No delegates 1891 Major George Patterson 1892 Captain Kenneth Hutchinson 1892 Thomas William Jeans 1892
Tasmania Major J G Davies Feb./Dec.1888 Captain William Hunt Dec.1888 and 1891 Major William Martin 1889 Captain Edwin Thomas Watchorn 1889 No meeting 1890 Major J G Davies 1891 Major James Henry Room 1892 Captain George Richardson (absent) 1892
Western Australia No delegates 1888-1892 New Zealand No delegates 1888-1891 Major James Purnell 1892 Lieutenant James Ross 1892 15
Federal Council of Rifle Associations: 1893-May 1901
President: Major-General Alexander Bruce Tulloch CB 1893 Colonel Aston Henry Warner 1894 Colonel Edward Robert Drury CMG 1895 No President – Vice-president held chair 1896 Colonel F Makin 1897 Major-General George Arthur French, CMG 1898 Major-General M F Downes, CMG (Secretary to Vic. Defence Minister) 1899 Colonel W Legge (Tasmania Commandant) 1900
Vice-President: Lieutenant-Colonel F S L Penno 1893 Lieutenant-Colonel J G Davies 1894 Lieutenant-Colonel John Sanderson Lyster 1895 Major James Reginald Somerville (President NZRA) 1896 Major G H Dean 1897 Lieutenant-Colonel W F Longfield 1898 Lieutenant-Colonel J M Templeton CMG 1899, May 1901 Colonel A H Warner 1900
Secretary/Treasurer: Lieutenant W J N Oldershaw 1893 Captain W J N Oldershaw 1894-1895 Sub-Lieutenant Albert Frank Stephens (for Captain Oldershaw) 1896 Captain W J N Oldershaw 1897, (1898) Lieutenant-Colonel J G Davies 1899 Lieutenant-Colonel J G Davies, CMG 1900-1901
Delegates New South Wales Captain G B Stack 1893 Lieutenant Maurice James Keating 1894 and 1896 Captain William Alfred Leggatt 1895 and 1898 Henry Vernon 1894, 1896, 1900 No delegates 1897 Lieutenant Bernard James Newmarch 1898 Major W J N Oldershaw 1899 Sub-Lieutenant A F Stephens 1899 Charles William Prott 1900 16
No delegates 1901
Victoria Major Charles Edward Ernest Umphelby 1893 and 1895 Major N W Kelly 1893-1894, 1898 Lieutenant-Colonel F S L Penno 1894 Lieutenant-Colonel J M Templeton 1895 Mr. William Sloane 1896 Major John James Hanby 1896 Lieutenant-Colonel C E E Umphelby 1897 Alexander Edward Monsborough 1897 Lieutenant-Colonel J M Templeton, CMG, VD 1898 Lieutenant-Colonel N W Kelly 1899 Colonel Robert Robertson 1900 Lieutenant James Michael Semmens 1900 Captain Charles Edward Merrett May 1901
South Australia Captain Malcolm George Hipwell 1893-1894 Captain H O Esselbach 1893 Captain Charles James Reade 1894 Lieutenant Colonel Lewis George Madley 1894 Not Known 1895 Colour-Sergeant William Arnold – as observer 1896 Captain M G Hipwell 1897- 1899 Captain James Edward Gooden 1898 Major G H Dean 1899 Major A E M Norton 1900 Colonel James Stuart (absent) 1900 Lieutenant-Colonel J.M. Templeton (Vic) representing May 1901 Sergeant J A Ross (Vic) representing May 1901
Queensland Major George Patterson 1893 Captain K Hutchison (absent) 1893 Captain Frederick Gustavus Hamilton 1894-1895 Captain William Gartside 1894 - 1895 George Given Ferguson 1895 Lieutenant-Colonel K Hutchison 1896 Major John Joseph Byron 1896 Lieutenant K Hutchinson 1897- 1898 Mr Alexander Ferguson 1898 17
Lieutenant K Hutchison 1899 No delegates 1900 Lieutenant James Richard Sankey May 1901 Lieutenant K Hutchison May 1901
Tasmania Lieutenant-Colonel J G Davies 1893 and 1897 Major James Henry Room 1893 Major Ernest Townsend Wallack 1894 Captain George Richardson 1894 Captain Robert Henry 1895 and 1897 Lieutenant Walter Croft 1895 No delegate 1896 Major J H Room 1897 Lieutenant-Colonel J G Davies 1898 Captain G Richardson 1898 Major R Henry 1899-1900 Captain Arthur Charles Parker 1900-May 1901 Lieutenant-Colonel Thomas May Evans May 1901
Western Australia Captain Charles Youle (absent) 1893 Captain Robert Henderson Cowan (absent) 1893 No delegates 1894-May 1901
New Zealand Major James Purnell 1893 Lieutenant James Ross 1893 No delegates 1894 Lieutenant Richard Clement Kirk 1895 William Henry Ballinger 1895 Lieutenant R C Kirk 1896 No delegates 1897-May 1901
Commonwealth Council of Rifle Associations:1901-1921
CCRAA Council Presidents/Chairman Major General E Hutton 1903, GM 1904 Colonel P R Ricardo 1904 None (Finn retired, Hoad not yet appointed) 1905 Major-General J C Hoad 1906-1907 18
Lieutenant-Colonel J G Davies 1908 Brigadier-General G H Dean 1909-1910, 1912, 1920 Lieutenant-Colonel J W Castine 1911, 1913
Vice-Presidents Lieutenant-Colonel K Hutchinson (in the Chair) 1901 Major-General M F Downes 1902 Colonel H Finn 1903 Brigadier-General J M Gordon 1904 Colonel P R Ricardo 1905 Colonel H D MacKenzie 1906 Colonel J S Lyster 1907
Secretary/Treasurer: Lieutenant-Colonel J G Davies 1901 Major R Henry 1902 F W Thomas (Assistant Secretary) 1902 A Cornish 1903, GM 1904 Lieutenant-Colonel G G H Irving 1905 Captain A C MacDonald 1905 Major J J Paine 1907-1913
Delegates New South Wales No delegates 1901 Lieutenant-Colonel W J N Oldershaw 1902 Lieutenant-Colonel W Holmes 1903 E J Brown 1903 Captain J J Paine 1902, GM 1904,1905-1906, 1908 Captain G Lindsay 1904-1905 Colour-Sergeant E A Wright 1904 Captain H Dakin 1906 Major J J Paine 1907 H E Mills 1907-1910, 1912-1913 J R Wallace 1911, 1920 O S Stanton 1920
Victoria Captain T S Marshall 1901, GM 1904, 1904, 1905 H J Guinn 1901 Captain J M Semmens 1902, 1907-1909, 1910-1911 Colonel J M Templeton 1902, 1903, 1905 19
P. Fargher 1903 Captain J Lynch 1904 Major C E Merrett 1904, 1906, 1908-1910, 1912-1913 Lieutenant (RAN) O L A Burford 1906 J Murray 1907 S W Parker 1911 Major J M Semmens 1912 Major T S Marshall 1913 Colonel J E Merrett 1920 Colonel J M Semmens 1920
South Australia Lieutenant-Colonel J M Templeton (Vic) representing 1901 Sergeant J A Ross (Vic) representing 1901 Lieutenant-Colonel G H Dean 1902, 1903 A Cornish 1903, 1906 F S Bleechmore 1904, 1909 Lieutenant-Colonel G H Dean 1904-1909 A Cornish 1902, GM 1904 Lieutenant-Colonel J W Castine 1907-1908, 1910, 1912, 1920 L H Story 1911 N A Webb 1913
Queensland Alexander Ferguson 1901, 1903, 1907-09 Lieutenant-Colonel J S Lyster 1901 Captain J R Sankey 1902 Lieutenant E G Diddams 1902 T Pye 1903, GM 1904, 1906-1907, 1909-1910 H Motton GM 1904 E W Hearne 1904 W G Willoughby 1904 Not known 1905 G Shaw 1906 Lieutenant W. H. Berry 1908 Andrew Ferguson 1910-13, 1920 A R Cross 1920
North Queensland C E Johnsey 1911 G P Foot 1912 A W Skewes 1913 20
P G Mathews 1920 Lieutenant-Colonel J J Paine (NSW) representing 1920
Tasmania Major R Henry 1901, 1903, 1905 Captain G Richardson 1901 Captain J Gatty 1902-1903 Captain J E C Lord GM 1904 G Howitt 1904 Lieutenant-Colonel J G Davies 1905-1908 Major G Richardson 1906-1908 Major P W G Pinnock 1909 No delegates (T S Marshal from Victoria representing) 1911 H F Paul 1909-1910, 1912-1913 Justice H Nichols 1910, 1912-13 T C Simpson 1920 W J McElwee 1920
Western Australia No delegates 1901-2 Captain J H Eales 1903, 1904 R G Ferguson 1903, 1904 Lieutenant-Colonel N W Kelly (Vic) representing GM 1904 Senator A P Mathieson GM 1904 Not known 1905 No delegates 1906 Lieutenant F C Curwood 1907 Captain G Lindsay (NSW for WA) 1907 G Smith 1908 W Walker 1908 Colonel J C Strickland 1909 E E Brimage 1909, 1911, 1913 No Delegates 1910 Captain L B Welch 1911 R R Rodgers 1912 Constable J S Simpson 1913 R Peart 1912, 1920 J F Ryle 1920 Senior Constable J S Simpson 1920
New Zealand No delegates (final New Zealand membership year of the Council) 1901 21
Others Alderman T Proe, Mayor of Brisbane, 1901 Lieutenant-Colonel M W Bayly, DAAG 1902 Brigadier-General H Finn as NSW Commandant 1904 Lieutenant-Colonel G G H Irving as DAAG 1904 Captain T S Marshall 1906 Commander S A Pethebridge, Acting Secretary of Defence 1907 Colonel E T Wallack, Adjutant-General CMF 1908 Colonel J H A Lee, SA Commandant 1908 Major T S Marshall 1908 Major M M Boam, Director Rifle Associations and Rifle Clubs 1911 Major F B Heritage, C.O. School of Musketry 1912 Major W H Osborne, DRA&RC 1912-13, 1920 Lieutenant-Colonel R H Beardsmore 1920 Brigadier-General C H Foott 1920
Commonwealth Council of Rifle Associations: 1921-1941
CCRAA Council Chairman Colonel Sir Charles Edward Merrett, Kt., CBE, VD 1921-1941
Secretary Colonel/ Brigadier John Jackson Paine, VD 1921-1923 Lieutenant-Colonel William Henry Osborne, MBE, VD 1923-1941
Treasurer Brigadier John Jackson Paine, CBE, VD 1923-1933 Aubrey Sherwood Spencer 1934-1941
Delegates New South Wales Major/Colonel J J Paine, VD 1921-1934 John Ross Wallace 1921-24 Lieutenant Colonel Robert Henry Beardsmore, DSO, VD 1925, 1927, 1928 Charles Robert Garnham 1926 Aubrey Sherwood Spencer 1932-1946 Henry Brisbane Jamieson, MBE 1937-1947 Lieutenant-Colonel Richard Owen Wynne, DSO (for Jamieson) 1939
22
Victoria Colonel C E Merrett, VD 1921-1946 Colonel J M Semmens, OBE, VD 1921-1934 Major Arthur Jordan (proxy for Merrett, in England) 1928 Major A Jordan 1937-1941
South Australia Brigadier-General G H Dean, CBE, VD 1921-1948 Frank Sidney Bleechmore 1921-1927 Thomas James Henwood Mitchell (for J W Castine) 1922 Robert Henderson Hall (for Dean, in England) 1927 James Murdock Archer Durrant, CMG, DSO (for F S Bleechmore) 1928 Clement Claude Castine 1932-1938 Lieutenant-Colonel Francis Mayfield Best 1938-1941
Queensland Andrew Ferguson (SQRA) 1921 Philip George Matthews (NQRA) 1921 Benjamin Cloudsdale (SQRA) 1922-1924 David Hillock Guthrie (NQRA) 1923, 1925 Herbert Walter Hyde (SQRA) 1924 Lawrence Herbert Story (SQRA) 1925, 1927 Captain William Edward McIlwaine (vice D Guthrie - NQRA) 1927 Captain W E McIlwaine (NQRA) 1932 William Gordon Duncan (SQRA) 1928, 1932, 1934, 1937, 1939, Henry Withnall (NQRA) 1934, 1937, 1939,
Tasmania Ernest Reuben Goucher 1921 Henry Francis Paul 1922-1923 Thomas Cookson Simpson 1921-1933, 1937-1939 Lieutenant-Colonel Archibald Clifford Blacklow, DSO (for Simpson) 1928 Captain W H Gray, VD 1924-1927, 1932, 1934 E R Goucher (for Simpson) 1934 Percy McPherson Gillies 1937-1939
Western Australia Harry John Simper (for Robert Peart) 1921, 1932 R Peart 1922, 1923, 1924 John Samuel Eastmon 1921-1922, 1924, 1926-1928, 1937-1938 James Freemen Ryle 1923 J F Ryle (for R Peart) 1925, 1926 23
Edward Thomas (for J S Eastmon) 1925 E Thomas 1932 Frederick William Allsop 1927-1928 Bertram John Richards (nominated but no meeting of CCRAA) 1933 Ernest Elisha Brimage 1937 Thomas Richards Buddee 1938 T R Buddee (for H Marsh) 1939
DRA&C/DRC Major William Henry Osborne 1912-13, 1920 Edward Fetherstonhaugh 1927-1930 Major/Lieutenant-Colonel Victor Paul Stantke 1931-1936 Major/Lieutenant-Colonel Thomas Edgar Weavers, OBE 1937-1939 Colonel George Francis Murphy 1941
24