'Forty acres and a crow': A comparison of soldier settlement in Australia after the two World Wars

Abstract

Private land ownership has always been an important goal for white Australians. From 1788 to the 1960s the evolving policies of public land distribution had officially encouraged small farmers, because officials gave credence to the notion that social and economic benefits would thereby be conferred on the settler society. Initially this was challenged by pastoralists who moved beyond the known boundaries of settlement and simply took up large holdings. Profit and the status of land ownership provided inducement for free settlers to farm in the Australian colonies, and to battle an often hostile environment. The same motivation persuaded many emancipists, army and navy personnel to settle on the land. An imbalance between large squatters' holdings and those of small settlers emerged as a political issue by the 1860s, and the colonial Selection Acts of the period were introduced to address the problem. Individuals were encouraged to select a small block from the squatters' land and purchase it on a time payment system. But many found that it was inferior land, sometimes without water, and quite unsuited to small scale farming. Undeterred, governments amended their small farm policies yet again. This time the Closer Settlement Acts of the 1890s and early twentieth century allowed for alienated land to be repurchased by governments. A feature of this phase of land settlement was the development of roads and railways to service the farms and enable greater supervision of the settlers. Once again the scheme suffered from indifferent results with many settlers struggling to earn a living from their farm. Nevertheless, closer settlement remained in place. Land settlement was seen as an essential element for Australia's progress, prosperity, and growth in the future. When the soldiers, sailors and aviators of World War I returned to Australia as heroes they remembered Prime Minister W.M. Hughes and his recruitment pledge that volunteers would be rewarded with pensions, homes, education and training. Since 1916 the main focus of these encouragements was the promise of farm ownership due to the large numbers of unemployed ex-servicemen, and their potential to incite civil unrest and thereby cause political embarrassment. Additionally, the Commonwealth believed it would be an easy matter to transfer the established state closer settlement schemes from civilians to service personnel. The promise of land ownership was welcomed because it encapsulated the returned men's hopes and dreams of an independent way of life.