‘Sometimes a little injustice must be suffered for the public good’

How the National Security (Aliens Control) Regulations 1939 (Cth) affected the lives ofGerman, Italian, Japanese and Australian born women living in Australia

during the Second World War.

Doctor of Philosophy

Maria Glaros

University of Western Sydney

2012

P a g e | ii

Acknowledgements

This thesis would not have been possible without the assistance from my supervisors Judith Snodgrass,

Carol Liston and Elizabeth Roberts. Judith and Carol have guided me throughout the years, providing

invaluable support and have helped me develop my methodological approach. I would like to thank

Elizabeth for her support, encouragement and enthusiasm in the topic. All supervisors have been

patient and understanding throughout my experience and for this I am most grateful.

Thank you to all my friends who provided their encouragement during my study, especially Kate Gould,

Raylene Dagher and Penny Karanasos. I would also like to express my gratitude to all the women who

agreed to participate in interviews and contributed to this research. I would also like to recognize the

staff at the National Archives of Australia, National Library, State Library, and University Western

Sydney library.

And finally, I would like to acknowledge and thank my parents who have supported me and offered

their assistance since I began this project. And most importantly, a big thank you to my wonderful,

husband Emanuel, who has been patient and supportive from the start to finish of this thesis.

P a g e | iii

Statement of Originality

The work presented in this thesis is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, original except as

acknowledged in the text. I hereby declare that I have not submitted this material, either in full or in

part, for a degree at this or any other institution.

....................................................................................................

(Signature)

P a g e | iv

Contents Page

List of Tables v

List of Appendices vi

Abbreviations vii

Abstract viii

Introduction 1

PART I: OUT BREAK OF WAR

Chapter One: The Rule of Law 38

Chapter Two: ‘…for the glory of greater Italy’: Italian cruisers MV Remo and

MV Romolo 90

PART II: ENEMY ALIENS ON LAND

Chapter Three: German at Heart 130

Chapter Four: Risk to National Security 182

Chapter Five: ‘Interned as a precautionary measure’ 225

PART III: VICTIMS OF CIRCUMSTANCE

Chapter Six: ‘A certain war psychosis’: German Jewish Women living in

New South Wales during the Second World War. 263

Chapter Seven: The Wives of Enemy Aliens 313

Conclusion 351

Appendices 356

Bibliography 371

P a g e | v

List of Tables

Page

Table 1 Registration figures of enemy alien, 30 September 1945 51

Table 2 Internment Figures, 31 March 1944 185

Table 3 Ages of 116 Italian women living in New South Wales

during the Second World War 186

Table 4 Ages of 151 German‐Jewish women living in New South

Wales during the Second World War 268

Table 5 Ages Australian‐born women living in New South

Wales during the Second World War 315

P a g e | vi

List of Appendices

Page

Appendix One: A list of the Classification of Nationals 356

Appendix Two: Surveillance Organization Chart – First World War 357

Appendix Three: Surveillance Organization Chart – Second World War 358

Appendix Four: Registration, Questionnaire & Parole Form 359

Appendix Five: Application Form to Own a Wireless 367

Appendix Six: Application for Naturalization 369

Appendix Seven: DVD ‐ Details of 750 women examined in this study 370

P a g e | vii

Abbreviations

ABC Australian Broadcasting Commission

ACAC Aliens Classification and Advisory Committee

AJWS Australian Jewish Welfare Society

ALP Australian Labor Party

AMF Australian Military Forces

ARO Aliens Registration Officer

ASIO Australian Security Intelligence Branch

AWAS Australian Women's Auxiliary Services

AWC Allied Works Council

BBC British Broadcasting Commission

BHP Broken Hill Propriety Limited

CAC Civil Aliens Corps

CCC Civil Constructional Corps

CIB Commonwealth Investigation Branch

CPA Communist Party of Australia

CPF Commonwealth Police Force

DSO Defense Security Organisation

IWW Industrial Workers of the World

MPI Military Police Intelligence Section

NAA National Archives of Australia

NSDAP National Sozialistische Deutsche Arbeites Partei

POW Prisoner of War

UELCA United Evangelical Lutheran Church of Australia

WAAFS Women's Auxiliary Air Force

P a g e | viii

ABSTRACT

Throughout Australia’s history xenophobic immigration policies and security measures have appeared

in times of uncertainty. The implementation of the Anti‐Terror laws in 2005 inspired me to carry out

research on important security measures introduced at the outbreak of the Second World War in

September 1939. Migrants living in Australia became subject to the National Security (Aliens Control)

Regulations 1939 (Cth) introduced by the Commonwealth government. ‘Non‐British’ persons living in

Australia were required to register as ‘aliens’; nationals from countries with which Australia was at war

were classified as ‘enemy aliens’. This included all German Italian and Japanese nationals. In addition,

Australian women married to enemy aliens lost their British nationality under the Nationality Act 1920

(Cth) and were required to register as enemy aliens.

This study focuses on five groups of women affected by the legislation: Australian born women of

German descent, Italian born women, Australian born women of Japanese descent, German Jewish

refugee women, and Australian born women married to Italian nationals. These groups were chosen

not only to highlight the various ways in which the Regulations were applied to women of different

nationalities, but also to address a gap in the literature on the control and internment of ‘alien’ women,

despite the vast amount of material that was available at the National Archives of Australia (NAA). This

thesis is in large part based on archival research. Files on over 700 women were examined, many of

which had never before been consulted. I also conducted five interviews, including three women who

were registered as enemy aliens during the war.

This dissertation has 3 parts. Part I provides an analysis of the Aliens Control Regulations and those

who helped administer the laws. It also provides context on the operation of these laws by detailing

the experience of Italian women who were detained under the Regulation just moments after Italy

entered the war. Part II provides case studies illustrating the diverse ways in which these Regulations

were applied. Part III shows women who fell victim to circumstance – German‐Jewish refugee women

who were wrongly categorized as ‘enemy aliens’ and Australian born women married to Italian

nationals, unaware that they had lost their British status.

P a g e | ix

The case studies presented in this thesis show that ‘war hysteria’, discrimination, isolation, racism and

victimization were all part of the wartime experience of these women who were caught in the net of

the Aliens Control Regulations.

P a g e | 1

Introduction

That a Security Act was essential to cope with subversive activities, should they arise, is obvious. That

the Act was administered in a glaringly careless and needlessly harsh manner, is equally obvious. It

was moderation where it touched property; it was severity when it touched human freedom.

1

(German national and former South Australian Member of Parliament, Hermann Homburg)

On Saturday, 17 October 2009, I attended a symposium on 150 Years of Italians in Queensland’

which was held at Dante Alighieri Society in Brisbane. The symposium was a great success, with

many fascinating papers on the history of Italians in Queensland. However, there was one

important aspect that stood out that day for me – no paper was given on the experience of Italian

women in Queensland during the Second World War.2 This omission was emphasised by the fact

that at the symposium I had met an Australian woman, Francesca Maria Merenda, born in Innisfail

in northern Queensland, of Italian parents. Francesca was interned in Australia during the war just

after she turned eighteen years of age. Because of their Italian origin, Francesca and her family

were classified as enemy aliens when Italy declared war on the Allies in June 1940. Francesca and I

exchanged details and organised a meeting where I interviewed her about her ordeal. I found out

that her father Paolo Merenda came to Australia in 1920 and worked at Innisfail cutting sugar cane.

Three years later, Paolo’s fiancé, Nicoletta, followed him to Australia. Francesca describes how they

married in Australia:

Dad’s mate who went up with him from Innisfail to Cairns, in those days it was a big trip, you know

1923 I’m talking about. His friend said to him, 'Don’t worry Paul', he said, “..look after your fiancée”.

So Dad arranged to be married that day then go to Innisfail the next day, where he was living and

Mum said “Where’s my suitcases?”And the fellow said to Dad, “Don’t worry I put them on the rail

motor, I’ve sent them down, you don’t have to worry about them tomorrow”. In the suitcases were

1 Hermann Homburg was a former South Australian Member of Parliament who was interned during the war because of

his involvement in German organizations. H. Homburg, South Australian Lutherans and Wartime Rumours. Adelaide:

Self Published 1947, p. 93.

2 ‘150 Years of Italians in Queensland’ Symposium, Dante Alighieri Society, Brisbane, 17 October 2009.

P a g e | 2

Mum’s bridal frock, her wedding dress and the veil, and she couldn’t put them on. So what could she

do, a girl could not spend the night with a man not married, so they went and got married in the

clothes that she had got off the boat, and then went to Innisfail the next day, then went to the

photographer all dressed up and they had their wedding photos taken in their bridal finery, and they

sent them to Italy to the family.3

Francesca was born on 16 September 1924. Her parents anglicised her name to Francesca Mary

when they registered her as an alien. When Italy entered the war, Francesca’s father was arrested

for associating with other Italian men who were members of the Fascist Party. He was interned in

December 1941. Francesca and her mother were not interned until October 1942. Authorities took

their photos and on the night of their arrest, Francesca and her mother slept ‘in the gaol house, on

the floor with the drunks’.4 The next day they were sent to Tatura, in north eastern Victoria, where

they would spend 16 months interned at the camp where they were reunited with Paolo. As

Francesca described the camp: ‘we had barbed wire fences all around us and we had the guards

sitting up there with their guns, you know, it was a military camp’.5

When asked the reason for her internment, Francesca responded

The Australian Government….They interned me and I read my papers many years later.I was a 'potential

spy' and a 'danger to the Commonwealth of Australia' and I believe, this is my belief, it was because I

could speak both Italian and English and if anyone needed anything in a little town called Tully in North

Queensland, they'd go to my father and he would send me with that person to the Police station or to

the ‐ everywhere they had to go and help them out with the language. 6

It has been over sixty‐five years since the end of the Second World War. Yet the history of the

German, Italian and Japanese women in Australia who were classified as enemy aliens within the

National Security (Aliens Control) Regulations 1939 (Cth) during the war remains to be written.

3 Francesca Merenda. Personal Interview. 10 October 2008.

4 Francesca Merenda. Personal Interview. 10 October 2008.

5 Francesca Merenda. Personal Interview. 10 October 2008.

6 Francesca Merenda. Personal Interview. 10 October 2008.

P a g e | 3

Francesca’s interview provides a fascinating perspective on how she was treated during internment

and the racial antagonisms that existed during this time. Her story indicated the level of concern

the Commonwealth Government had towards enemy aliens during war‐time and how authorities

interned enemy aliens without any evidence to suggest that they were a potential threat to the

nation’s security.7 Indeed, it is clear from the files held at the National Archives of Australia (NAA)

that while authorities tried their best to find evidence to implicate the Merenda family, their failure

to produce any did not deter authorities from detaining them.

Like other migrant women who grew up in Australia during war‐time, Francesca placed no blame on

the Commonwealth Government for her internment, especially when considering the threat of

enemy invasion.8 However, what Francesca may not have been informed of was that the

Commonwealth Government, while drafting legislation, was well aware of the ramifications

minority groups would experience as a result of the implementation of the National Security Act

1939 (Cth). As evidenced in the Second Reading Speech, the issue of national security was a hotly

debated topic in Parliament, and as we will see, many argued that minority groups would fall victim

to the legislation put forward.

Historiography

The history of these German, Italian and Japanese women has been ignored far too long. Their

stories reflect anxieties of Australia’s past and are valuable to the understanding of current events

in this country. The purpose of this thesis is to ensure that these stories are recognized and not

7 German‐Jewish refugee Ilona Balog also believed that given the context of threat to Australia’s security, anyone

foreign would be subject to discrimination. See Chapter Six.

8 See Ilona Balog. Personal Interview. 31 October 2008.

P a g e | 4

forgotten by younger generations. German, Italian and Japanese communities have contributed to

Australia’s multicultural society and identify these stories as a meaningful part in Australia’s history

‐ a history of exclusion based on race.

Australian histories have tended to focus on the internment of men during the Second World War.

This study focuses on migrant and Australian‐born women who were interned or affected by other

key aspects of the Aliens Control Regulations. Kay Saunders in her work referred to what has

already been done by the government to comprehend this part of our history, including a dinner

that was held in Western Australia by the Premier in 1990 and in New South Wales by its Premier in

1992 which only distinguished Italian internment in Australia.9 However, there has been no

acknowledgement of widespread internment and those affected by the Aliens Control Regulations

by the Australian War Memorial; there was no official acknowledgement or apology made by the

‘Australia Remembers 1945‐1995’ campaign; the ‘Prigioniero Di Guerra: POW Italian migrants

Exhibition’ at the Liverpool Regional museum in 2005 focused only on the internment of Italian men

during the war; and more recently, and there was no recognition of Italian women living in

Queensland during the war‐time at the ‘150 Years of Italians in Queensland Symposium’ held at the

Dante Alighieri Society, Brisbane on 17 October 2009.10

9 K. Saunders and R. Daniels et. al., Alien Justice: Wartime Internment in Australia and North America. St. Lucia:

University of Queensland Press, 2000, p. xviii.

10 Casula Powerhouse Arts Centre and Liverpool Regional Museum. Prigioniero Di Guerra: POW Italian Migrant's

Exhibition. 2005. Casula Powerhouse Arts Centre and Liverpool Regional Museum, Sydney; and ‘150 Years of Italians in

Queensland’ Symposium.

P a g e | 5

The most significant resource in this study was written by Noel Lamidey. During the early 1970s,

acknowledgement of the treatment towards migrants in Australia during the Second World War

was highlighted by Lamidey. Lamidey not only helped to administer the Aliens Control Regulations,

but also headed the Aliens Classification and Advisory Committee (ACAC), established in September

1942, which aimed ‘to work in close association with the Director‐General of Security on all matters

affecting aliens, and to see that our treatment of them did not fall short of that of other allied

democratic countries’.11 In 1974, he released three reports that documented amendments that

were made to some of the ‘major measures taken by legislative enactment and administrative

procedure to control aliens’ during the Second World War.12

The first report, written by Lamidey himself in 1947, was titled ‘A Report to the Honourable Arthur

  1. Calwell H.P. Minister for Immigration upon some Aspects of Aliens Control in Australia During

Time of War’. The other two documents were included as attachments. One was a report by Mr

Justice Reed, on the internment and control of Italians in Australia and the other by the ACAC titled,

‘Interim Report submitted to the right Honourable H.V. Evatt, LL.D., K.C., M.P. the Attorney General

of the Commonwealth of Australia’, written in March 1943.13 These reports are significant because

they provide an insight into the Commonwealth Government’s stance toward the treatment of

enemy aliens during the war. Lamidey believed that the purpose of the publication of the report

would be to appeal to

anyone sufficiently interested to seek further and deeper into the matters adverted to herein and to

appreciate some of the difficulties inherent in ensuring that even in times of national emergency the

reputation of the Commonwealth in its treatment of aliens should not fall below the standard of fairness

11 N. Lamidey, Aliens Control in Australia 1939‐46. Sydney: N. Lamidey, 1974, p. 4.

12 Lamidey, Aliens Control, p. 1.

13 Lamidey, Aliens Control.

P a g e | 6

and reasonableness attained by other Allied countries, reference must be made to the 3 reports of the

Aliens Classification and Advisory Committee.14

Although Lamidey clearly stated his intention in 1943 that the report would be circulated for public

discussion, it would not be published for another thirty years.

The date of the publication of his work is vital to our understanding of the Commonwealth

Government’s attitudes towards migrants in Australia. It was not until March 1974, when Lamidey

published the reports himself, that the public finally gained access to it. Archival documents held at

the NAA in Canberra reveal that Lamidey completed a draft of this work before its release. He had

also tried to have it published in 1967. He sent a copy to the Attorney General’s office, which was

then sent to the Department of Immigration to be reviewed. Lamidey was anxious for a response.

After two months, clearly concerned about the lack of progress, he wrote ‘Just in case there is a

possibility that the electronic sorting machine is responsible for the absence of any reply to

my…letters I write to say I am now at the printing stage and propose to go ahead as quickly as

possible’.15 The Secretary of Attorney General’s office, E. J. Hook responded to Lamidey, suggesting

that he remove certain passages that implied the report was available for further public scrutiny.

The reports were not available to the public and authorities did not want Lamidey to refer to any

unanswered questions which may arise in relation to the Aliens Control Regulations. Hook

responded

Whether these reports had a ‘security classification’ is, I am sure you will appreciate, not at all conclusive

of the question whether they might be released to the public…Whether the reports to which you refer

should be made available is a matter which has to be decided by the relevant department in the light of

the general Commonwealth policy on access to Commonwealth archives…The second aspect which

14 Lamidey, Aliens Control, p. 2.

15 Letter from Noel Lamidey addressed to Secretary of Attorney General’s office, E.J. Hook, 4 March 1967. See ‘Report

by Mr N W Lamidey on alien control in time of war’. A432/1661/2232, NAA, Canberra.

P a g e | 7

troubles me is the extent to which your manuscript discloses, in many places, the detailed operations and

conclusions of the Committee…knowledge at the time could, of course, be freely used although I suggest

that it would be very useful if you were able to indicate references to published sources.

16

It appears that the Commonwealth Government avoided the publication of Lamidey’s report. The

report was suppressed by the Commonwealth Government, who requested that certain details be

omitted and not disclosed to the Australian public. Lamidey did not publish the report until seven

years later, which happened to be the same year in which the report was made public by the

National Archives of Australia (NAA). It is quite possible that Lamidey did not share the same views

of the Commonwealth Government during the late 1960s and chose to wait until the report was

made public in 1974.

Although he was limited to the amount of opinion he was allowed to provide, it is clear that

Lamidey’s conclusions on migration were informed by the lessons learned from troubled areas of

the world. The late 1960s saw the war in Asia, which was attracting considerable attention to the

management of the Commonwealth Governments’ immigration policies. Regarding his role as head

of the Assimilation Division of the Department of Immigration, Lamidey wrote that these ‘are all

valuable documents with respect to Australia’s war‐time history and to an understanding of the

background from which derived Australian post‐war immigration policy and attitudes to immigrants

when they arrived’.17 These documents ‘not only represent a segment of Australia’s history but

16 Draft letter from the Secretary of Attorney General’s office, E.J. Hook to Noel Lamidey, 18 May 1967. See ‘Report by

Mr N W Lamidey on alien control in time of war’. A432/1661/2232, NAA, Canberra.

17 Lamidey, Aliens Control, Preface, unpaginated.

P a g e | 8

emphasises to scholars and researchers the problems which had to be faced in our treatment of the

Alien community in the turbulent years of the Second World War’.18

After the war ended, the Commonwealth Government considered the low population of the

country to be a security risk, and in order to protect the nation, Australia had to ‘populate or

perish’. The ACAC report that was prepared for Labor politician and later Minister for Immigration

in 1945, Arthur Calwell, stated the need for both an increase in population through large scale

immigration, and consequently the need for a ministry to oversee it:

This was the first time in Australia’s history that migration had come to be regarded as of sufficient

importance to warrant Ministerial ranking in its own right…But we had learnt our lesson and realised

that without a vast immigration we would as a nation remain in the world’s backwater; if indeed we did

not sink altogether.

19

Lamidey was always concerned about the effects of war‐time legislation and issues regarding

immigration policies. Lamidey and his family moved to London where he took on his new position

appointed by Calwell as Chief Migration Officer in 1946. In his memoirs, Lamidey was hopeful that

what happened during the war would never occur again, and that Australian society would learn

from past experiences.20 He wrote in his report:

it may also in some minor manner help us all to realise that continued progress by mankind in the

search for peace can be helped considerably by increased knowledge, tolerance and understanding in

human relations rather than by death and destruction caused by the war.21

Calwell justified the Commonwealth Government’s actions to control aliens by claiming that while

the war continued, the control of aliens ‘may have been inevitable, for war as the democracies

18 Lamidey, Aliens Control, Preface, unpaginated.

19 N. Lamidey, Partial Success: my years as a public servant. Hunters Hill: N.W. Lamidey, 1970, p. 29.

20 See Lamidey, Partial Success.

21 Lamidey, Aliens Control, p. 5.

P a g e | 9

wage it is largely an affair of improvisation, and in urgent situations which demand prompt and

effective action there is little time to weigh the niceties of human rights’.22 However, Calwell did

state there must never be another need for war‐time measures regarding the control of aliens. He

argued:

It would be folly…to ignore the lessons of the war years. Mistakes were made during those years, and

machinery devised in all good faith was sometimes found to be too cumbersome or otherwise

defective. All thoughtful Australians realize that if we are to hold this Continent, the population must

be greatly increased, and with increase immigration must become a subject of first importance.23

22 Lamidey, Aliens Control: ‘A Report to the Honourable Arthur A. Calwell H.P. Minister for Immigration upon some

Aspects of Aliens Control in Australia During Time of War, 1947’, p. 1. Calwell wrote in 1947, ‘I believe that on the

whole the record of Commonwealth in the respect of aliens’ control is very creditable. The restrictive measures

adopted were under constant consideration, and the relevant regulations were revised from time to time to remove

the more obvious injustices’. [Lamidey, Aliens Control, p. 1].

23 Lamidey, Aliens Control, p. 2.

Figure 2: Arthur Calwell in 1940

National library of Australia, Arthur Calwell.

[http://nla.gov.au/nla.pic‐vn3663850‐v]. Date

Unknown. Accessed: 25 March 2012.

Figure 1: Noel Lamidey as Chief Migration Officer in

1950

‘Immigration ‐ Department of Immigration officers

‐ Noel W. Lamidey, CMO (Chief Migration Officer),

London 1947‐1953, London Processing Section’.

A12111/ 2/1950/35A/1, NAA, Canberra.

P a g e | 10

Other important works that focus on Australian war‐time history were written by Paul Hasluck, who

was an official historian of the Second World War, before entering the realm of politics. He became

Governor General in 1969. Hasluck was commissioned by the Commonwealth Government to write

twenty two volumes of Australia’s involvement in the war. Two volumes were completed before he

entered politics. In the first volume, Hasluck wrote that the most important security measure

during the first six months of war had been the internment of enemy aliens, along with other

measures which included the registration of all aliens and the restrictions on their travel and

movement.24

In spite of signalling their importance in this early work, Hasluck neglected the issue of security

measures in subsequent volumes, devoting only six pages to ‘The Wartime Treatment of Aliens’ as

an appendix to his volume The Government and the People, 1939‐1941.25 Michael McKernan, in his

1983 book All In!: Fighting the War at Home, scarcely mentioned the Aliens Control Regulations and

argued that they had an insignificant impact on the lives of aliens living in Australia. McKernan

claimed that most enemy aliens ‘were free to come and go as they pleased, subject to a few

restraints such as reporting their movements to local police’.26 In contrast, I will argue that the

German, Italian and Japanese women were subject to more than ‘a few restraints’, and that these

had an adverse impact on their civil liberties.

24 See P. Hasluck, The Government and the People, 1939‐1941: Volume One. Canberra: Australian War Memorial, 1952

and P. Hasluck, The Government and the People, 1942‐1945: Volume Two. Canberra: Australian War Memorial, 1970.

25 See Appendix 4 Hasluck, Volume One, pp. 593‐98.

26 M. McKernan, All In!: Fighting the War at Home. St. Leonards: Allen and Unwin, 1983, p. 33.

P a g e | 11

It was not until the last three decades that the issue of how war‐time internment policy affected

enemy aliens living in Australia became a point of discussion for historians. There have also been a

number of published works on internment in other countries. Comparisons with these studies are

beyond the scope of the present work.27 Margaret Bevege’s book Behind Barbed Wire: Internment

in Australia during World War II, was one of the first to provide an account of internment in

Australia. There were many criticisms of her work. Ilma Martinuzii O’Brien, for example, criticized

the fact that Bevege seems to regard internment as a ‘relatively benign experience’, on the grounds

that ‘the internees were not mistreated by their guards’.28 Bevege has also been criticized by

Andrew Moore for providing ‘little evidence of light and shade and few suggestions of fascists being

confused with anti‐fascists’.29 However, Bevege’s work must be recognised because of the

internment studies that followed during the 1980s and 1990s, generating much interest in the

topic.

27 See Alinder, Jasmine. Moving Images: Photography and the Japanese American Incarceration. Chicago: University of

Illinois Press, 2009; C.C. Aronsfeld, ‘Jewish Enemy Aliens in England during the First World War.’ Jewish Social Studies

Volume 18 Issue 4, 1956, pp. 275‐83; J. A. Bennett, ‘Japanese Wartime Internees in New Zealand: Fragmenting Pacific

Island Families.’ The Journal of Pacific History, Volume 44, Issue 1, 2009, pp. 61‐76; T. Kushner, ‘Clubland, Cricket Tests

and Alien Internment, 1939‐40.’ Immigrants & Minorities, Volume 11, Issue 3, 1992, pp. 79‐101; K. McAllister,

‘Photographs of a Japanese Canadian Internment camp: mourning loss and invoking a future.’ Visual Studies, Volume

21, Issue 2, 2006, pp. 133‐56; P. Panayi, et. al, Minorities in Wartime: national and Racial Groupings in Europe, North

America and Australia during the Two World Wars. Oxford: Berg publishers Limited, 1993; D. Saunders, ‘Aliens in Britain

and the Empire during the First World War.’ Immigrants & Minorities, Volume 4, Issue 1, 1985, pp. 5‐27; K. Saunders

and R. Daniels et. al, Alien Justice; J. Stewart, ‘Angels or Aliens? Refugee Nurses in Britain, 1938 to 1942.’ Medical

History, Volume 47, 2003, pp. 149‐72.

28 Elkner, Enemy Aliens, p. 16.

29 A. Moore, ‘…when the caretaker’s busy taking care’? Cross‐currents in Australian political surveillance and

internment, 1935‐1941’ in Saunders and Daniels et.al., Alien Justice, p. 49.

P a g e | 12

Authors that have dominated the topic of internment since Bevege’s publication, include Kay

Saunders and O’Brien.30 Most have focused on a particular ethnicity from a specific location, with

the exception of publications from Bevege and more recently, Beaumont, O’Brien and Trinca’s

edited Under Suspicion: Citizenship and Internment in Australia during the Second World War which

covers the experience of all three ethnicities, German, Italian and Japanese.31 Though similar to the

work presented in this thesis, this edition only provides a collection of the case studies of ten

individuals who were incarcerated during the Second World War.

Issues such as ethnic minorities and racial profiling in Australia have become topical due to

contemporary events. Most publications have discussed biographical accounts of those who were

incarcerated, focusing primarily on men interned during the war, and more recently, internment

issues that relate to citizenship and national security.32 As Christina Twomey recently described it,

30 K. Saunders, ‘Discovering’ the Subversive and the Saboteur: The Disjuncture between official records of internment

policy and practice and the remembered experiences of internees in Australia in the Second World War.’ Oral History

Association of Australia Journal, Volume 13, 1991; Saunders, War on the Homefront; K. Saunders, ‘Down on the farm:

Italian POWs in Australia 1941‐47’. Journal of Australian Studies, Volume 19, Issue 46, 1995; K. Saunders, ‘The stranger

in our gates: Internment Policies in the United Kingdom and Australia during the Two World Wars, 1014‐39.’

Immigrants & Minorities, Volume 22, Issue 1, 2003; K. Saunders and Daniels et., al, Alien Justice; and K. Saunders, and

  1. Taylor, ‘The Enemy Within? The Process of Internment of Enemy Aliens in Queensland 1939‐45.’ Australian Journal

of Politics and History, Volume 34, Issue 1, 1988.

31 See J. Beaumont, I. M. O’Brien and M. Trinca, et. al, Under Suspicion: Citizenship and Internment in Australia during

the Second World War. Canberra: National Museum of Australia, 2008 & Bevege, Behind Barbed Wire: Internment in

Australia during World War II. St. Lucia: University of Queensland Press, 1993.

32 Bevege, Behind Barbed Wire; K. Saunders, War on the Homefront: State Intervention in Queensland 1938‐1948. St

Lucia: University of Queensland Press, 1993; R. Bosworth and R. Ugolini et. al., War, Internment and Mass Migration:

The Italo‐Australian Experience 1940‐1990. Roma: Gruppo Editoriale Internazionale, 1992; Y. Nagata, Unwanted Aliens:

Japanese Internment in Australia. St Lucia: University of Queensland Press, 1996; and Beaumont, Under Suspicion.

P a g e | 13

the issue of internment has raised questions of ‘race, citizenship and rights’.33 Australian Citizenship

did not officially exist until 1948. However, as it happened, obtaining official citizenship did not

necessarily change things. Research has shown that British citizenship status was no protection

from the label ‘enemy alien’. As O’Brien shows, ‘the absence of a separate Australian citizenship

encouraged the development of a racialised construction of British subjecthood in some sections of

Australian society, and that boundaries were often drawn to exclude people from non‐British

origin’.34

There have been many cases of people naturalized as British subjects under the Nationality Act

1920 (Cth) who were interned or placed under restrictions during the war.35 As we will see, women

who were married to Italian men, as well as Australian‐born women of Japanese descent, were

subject to the Aliens Control Regulations despite their British nationality. The collection of their

stories in this study maintains the argument presented by O’Brien, who claimed that Australian

citizens were deprived of their civilian liberties and in most cases, incarcerated without trial.36

Work on Nazism and Italian fascism in Australia is also relevant to this thesis. Emily Graham‐Turner

and Gianfranco Cresciani have written books on Nazism and fascism that provide background for

the experience of German and Italian women in Australia. The topic of fascism among Italians

33 C. Twomey, ‘In the Front Line’?: Internment and Citizenship Entitlements in the Second World War.’ Australian

Journal of Politics and History, Volume 53, Issue 2, 2007, p. 194.

34 C. Elkner, I. M. O’Brien, G. Rando and A. Cappello, Enemy Aliens: The Internment of Italian Migrants in Australia

during the Second World War. Adelaide: Connor Court Publishing, 2005, p. 17.

35 Beaumont et. al., Under Suspicion, p. 11.

36 I. M. O'Brien, ‘Citizenship, Rights and Emergency Powers in Second World War Australia.’Australian Journal of Politics

and History, Volume 53, Issue 2, 2007, p. 207.

P a g e | 14

residing in Australia has been largely dominated by Cresciani.37 Very little work has concentrated on

Nazism in Australia, however, Turner‐Graham has produced one of the first detailed cultural study

of Nazi ideology during the inter war period in Australia.38 More recently, David Brown has

published work on fascism in Queensland.39 The literature concerning fascism and Nazism provided

the ideological context for the treatment of German and Italian communities throughout the war

period. Many German and Italian women in this study were aware of fascism and Nazism. The

stories presented show that there were indeed Australian German and Italian women who

sympathized with the Nazi and fascist causes. The ramifications of this will be discussed further in

Chapters Two and Three.

Among the useful primary sources on Germans settling in Australia is Charles Prices’ work German

Settlers in South Australia (published 1945). Price specialized in international migration and ethnic

minorities in Australia. He explained that the purpose of his work was to demonstrate:

37 See G. Cresciani, Fascism, Anti‐Fascism and Italians in Australia 1922‐1945. Canberra: Australian University Press,

1980; G. Cresciani, ‘Captivity in Australia: the case of the Italian Prisoners of war, 1940‐1947.’ Studi Emigrazione,

Volume 26, 1989; G. Cresciani, The Italians in Australia. Melbourne: Cambridge University Press, 2003; G. Cresciani,

Transfield: The First Fifty Years. Sydney: ABC, 2006; G. Cresciani, ‘Refractory Migrants. Fascist Surveillance on Italians in

Australia 1922‐1943.’ Italian Historical Society Journal, Volume 15, 2007. Other works on Nazi ideology in Australia

include G. Gumpl, and R. Kleinig. The Rise and Fall of Australia's No. 1 Nazi. Melbourne: Brulga Publishing Pty Ltd, 2007;

and K. Neumann, Chapter Seven ‘Victims of ‘unnecessary hardship and mental torture’: Walter Stolting, Wolf Klaphake,

and other incompatibles in wartime Australia’ in Beaumont, Under Suspicion.

38 See E. Turner‐Graham, ‘Never forget that you are a German’: Die Brücke, Deutschtumand National Socialism in

Australia’. University of Melbourne: unpublished thesis, 2006.

39 D. Brown, ‘Fascism within the pre World War II Italian Population of Queensland: a study of community processes

and interaction.’ Journal of the Royal Australian Historical Society, Volume 93, Issue 1, 2007; and D. Brown, ‘The Case of

the Brisbane Fascio: The transnational politics of the Italian Fascist Party.’ History Australia, Volume 6, Issue 1, 2009.

P a g e | 15

The extent to which members of the Nazi Party delayed the absorption process in Australia by spreading

amongst Australian‐born Germans the Nazi Volksgedanke—the theory that blood overrides nationality

and that all Germans abroad must retain their connection with the German ‘racial’ community.40

Without any concrete evidence, Price claimed that the Nazi Party was a hindrance towards the

‘absorption process’. My research has discovered that though there were Nazi sympathizers,

especially in South Australia, very few explicitly supported Nazi Germany. An Australian‐born man

of German descent, Hermann Homburg, former South Australian Parliamentarian and influential

figure among the German community in South Australia, wrote South Australian Lutherans and

Wartime Rumours in response to Price’s work, arguing that German organizations were preserving

German culture and there was ‘no record in this State of sabotage, treason or anything subversive

by any of its citizens, whatever their ancestry’.41 While many women in this study were conserving

German culture, they were clearly also supporters of Nazism. Despite this revelation, the numbers

of members of the organization were so low that there was no real threat to the spread of Nazism

among the remaining German community.

Suzanne Rutland and Paul Bartrop have written articles concerning German‐Jewish refugees who

settled in Australia. These works highlighted the bigotry that was experienced by this last group,

the German‐Jewish aliens, upon their arrival in Australia. Bartrop wrote about the flaws that existed

within the process of alien registration.42 These articles and biographical experiences help provide

40 C. A. Price, German Settlers in South Australia. Melbourne: Melbourne University Press, 1945, pp. 40‐1.

41 Homburg, South Australian Lutherans,p. 93.

42 S. Rutland, ‘Australian Responses to Jewish Refugee Migration before and after World War II.’ Australian Journal of

Politics and History, Volume 31, Issue 1, 1985; S. Rutland, ‘Postwar Anti‐Jewish Refugee Hysteria: A Case of Racial or

Religious Bigotry?’ Sojourners and Strangers, Journal of Australian Studies, Volume 77, 2003; and P. Bartrop, ‘Enemy

Aliens or Stateless Persons? The Legal Status of Refugees from Germany in Wartime Australia.’Journal of the Australian

Jewish Historical Society, Volume 10, Issue 4, 1988.

P a g e | 16

background information concerning German‐Jews in Australia during the war‐time, particularly

because this thesis argues that German‐Jewish settlers in Australia were wrongfully classified as

enemy aliens and should not have been affected by war‐time legislation.

Other resources are concerned with German, Italian and Japanese migration. There have been

countless texts on German and Italian pre‐war and post war migration which helped provide an

insight into the migratory patterns and cultural values of these women.43 Due to the lack of Asian

population during the early twentieth century, most scholarship concerning Asian migration and

cultural patterns focused on the strict immigration policies that existed. Authors Nagata, Pam Oliver

and Neville Meaney have become renowned for their work on Japanese in Australia, producing

helpful and informative work on Japanese in Australia before and after federation.44

43 W.D Borrie, Italians and Germans in Australia: A Study of Assimilation. Melbourne: The Australian University, F.W.

Cheshire, 1954; A. Diana, ‘Italian women in Ausralia.’ Affarisocialiinternazionali, Volume 16, Issue 2, 1988; M.

Mennicken‐Coley, The Germans in Western Australia: Innovators, Immigrants, Internees. Western Australia: Mt Lawley:

Cross print, 1993; D. O'Connor, No need to be afraid: Italian settlers in South Australia betweeen 1839 and the Second

World War. Adelaide: Wakefield Press, 1996; D. Phillips, ‘The Effect of Immigration on the Family: The Case of Italians in

Rural Australia.’ The British Journal of Sociology, Volume 26, Issue 2, 1975; Price, German Settlers; C. A. Price, Jewish

Settlers in Australia. Canberra: The Australian National University, 1964; N. Randazzo, and M. Cigler. The Italians in

Australia. Melbourne: AE Press, 1987;

44 See P. Oliver, ‘Japanese Relationships in White Australia: The Sydney Experience to 1941’. History Australia, Volume

4: Issue 1, 2007; P. Oliver, ‘Who is One of Us? (Re) Discovering the Inside‐out of Australia’s Japanese Immigrant

Communities, 1901‐1957’. Japanese Studies, Volume 22, Issue 3, 2002; P. Jones and P. Oliver, Changing histories:

Australia and Japan. Melbourne: Monash University Press, 2001; M. Auckland and P. Oliver et., al, Unexpected

encounters: Neglected histories behind the Australia‐Japan relationship. Melbourne: Monash University Press, 2007; P.

Oliver, “Citizens without certificates or enemy aliens? Japanese residents before 1947” in Beaumont Under Suspicion;

and A. Shnukal, G. Ramsay & Y. Nagata et. al., Navigating Boundaries: The Asian Diaspora in Torres Strait. Canberra:

Pandanus Books, 2004; Nagata, Unwanted Aliens; Y. Nagata, Chapter Eight ‘Native patriotism: the internment of Moshi

Inagaki in Australia during the Second World War’, in Beaumont Under Suspicion; and N. Meaney, Towards a New

Vision: Australia and Japan across time. Sydney: University of New South Wales Press, 2007.

P a g e | 17

‘Sometimes a little injustice must be suffered for the public good’

The title of this dissertation ‘Sometimes a little injustice must be suffered for the public good’, was

taken from a comment made by Assistant Treasurer of the Menzies government, Percy Claude

Spender in the House of Representatives on 8 September 1939 regarding his support for the

National Security Bill 1939 (Cth).45 The title captures the essence of the case studies that are

provided in this thesis, which highlight the effects that the National Security Act had on migrant

women, especially German, Italian, Japanese and Australian‐born women designated as ‘enemy

aliens’, living in Australia during the Second World War.

Non‐British subjects were required to register as aliens while those who ‘possessed the nationality

of a State of War with His Majesty; or being Stateless at any time possessed such a nationality’

45 Commonwealth, – Second Reading Speech, House of Representatives, 8 September 1939, 237 (Percy Claude

Spender).

Figure 3: Sir Percy Claude Spender, 1937

Adam Carr, ‘Members of the Australian House of

Representative’. Date Unknown,

[http://psephos.adamcarr.

net/countries/a/australia/membersgallery/re

psgallery1946.shtml]. Date Accessed: 25 March

2012.

P a g e | 18

were required to register as enemy aliens.46 When war first broke out Germans living in Australia

were classified as enemy aliens and most men were rounded up to be interned. As the war

progressed, Italians and Japanese were also categorised as enemy aliens. The general rule was that

women were not to be interned, with the exception of the Japanese. All Japanese ‐ men, women,

and children ‐ were interned after the bombing of Pearl Harbour. I will argue that the Aliens Control

Regulations were subjectively applied, referring to the various case studies presented in this

dissertation.

The Aliens Control Regulations were formed under the National Security Act. The Aliens Control

Regulations were implemented to control individuals and organizations affiliated with fascism and

Nazism that could influence non‐British persons living in Australia and was concerned with their

travel and movement. The Executive arm of Commonwealth Government gave local authorities

control over an alien’s place of residence; internment; control over their possessions and

employment; control over assembly, and propaganda.47 However, this was not the first time that

intelligence authorities targeted migrants and political dissidents living in Australia.

Pam Oliver suggested that one of the main reasons why innocent men and women were caught up

in the legislation was because of poor intelligence gathering during the Second World War.48 The

lack of organization in Australia’s war‐time security service was articulated by Lamidey:

It would be a fair comment I think to say that the Second World War caught Australia hopelessly

unprepared insofar as National security was concerned…we were without a National security

46 Lamidey, Aliens Control: ‘Report to the Honourable Arthur A. Calwell’ (1947), p. 5.

47 See Statutory Rules made under Commonwealth Acts during the year 1939. Canberra: Government of Australia, 1939.

48 P. Oliver, ‘Interpreting ‘Japanese Activities’ in Australia, 1888‐1945.’ Journal of the Australian War Memorial, Volume

36, 2002.

P a g e | 19

organization…the need for a coordinate central body properly equipped to deal with all aspects of

security and intelligence at both national and international level was non‐existent. This need had

been seen over the years by many far‐sighted people since the termination of the First World War

but by the time the Second World War was upon us it had not been bought into the realm of practical

politics.

49

The lack of security organization is evidently attributed to the inconsistent application of the Aliens

Control Regulations towards German, Italian and Japanese women.

The Commonwealth Investigation Branch (CIB) was established within the Attorney General’s

Department in 1919, after the First World War ended, as the Commonwealth Government’s sole

intelligence investigative body (See Appendix Two).50 It was not until March 1941, during the

Second World War, that Australia’s war‐time security was revamped as a more central organization.

The CIB consisted of inspectors who were located in each city across Australia, responsible to the

Director of the CIB, Major Harold Edward Jones. Appendix Three shows that Jones was responsible

to the Secretary of the Attorney General’s Office, who was then responsible to the Prime Minister

and Minister for Defence.51 The role of the CIB was to investigate ‘alleged offences against

Commonwealth Acts and matters of departmental concern’.52

49 Lamidey, Partial Success, p. 28.

50 F. Cain, The Origins of Political Surveillance in Australia. Melbourne: Angus & Robertson Publishers, 1983, p. xiii.

51 Cain, Origins of Political Surveillance, p. xiii.

52 C.D. Coulthard‐Clark, ‘Australia’s Wartime Security Service’. Defence Force Journal, Volume 16, Issue May/June, 1979,

  1. 23. Jones negotiated ‘a role for the Branch as agent for the Department of Home and Territories to investigate and

make recommendations on all naturalization and some immigration applications’. Jones was hoping that more work

would be provided for the Branch and it would provide ‘access to record concerning Australia’s alien population’. [D.

Dutton, ‘The Commonwealth Investigation Branch and the Political Construction of the Australian Citizenry, 1920‐40*.’

Labour History, Volume 75, 1998, p. 156].

P a g e | 20

The Army was responsible for censorship matters, but censorship of the press was handed over to

the Chief Publicity Censor who reported to the Minister for Information.53 In 1938, as the country

was heading closer to war, a special squad of thirty police officers was formed under military

control and Army officers were placed in full time positions in Police Headquarters where they

directed intelligence work. These positions later became known as the Military Police Intelligence

Section (MPI).54 The CIB handed over responsibilities for security activities to the MPI. Although

there was no central surveillance organization at the time, plans for censorship and the internment

of enemy aliens were already established while the War Book was being drafted.55 This enabled

‘preparations to be made in advance of war, including the drafting of initial control regulations and

orders’.56 The purpose of the War Book was ‘to facilitate the transition from peace to war, by

settling down the administrative actions that will be taken in the early stages of a war emergency;

indicating which Department or other Authority is responsible for action laid down in each field’.57

At the outbreak of war in September 1939, the Commonwealth Government introduced the Aliens

Control Regulations. The main objective was ‘to ensure that aliens, resident in Australia, enemy and

otherwise, could in no way become a danger to the country nor impede the progress of the war

53 Cain, Origins of Political Surveillance, p. 260. The main aim of censorship was to ‘prevent leakage of information’ and

to ‘provide a source of information’. [Cain, Origins of Political Surveillance, p. 260.]

54 Coulthard‐Clark, ‘Australia’s Wartime Security Service’, p. 23.

55 NAA, ‘Series notes for series D1614’.Date unknown,

[http://naa12.naa.gov.au/scripts/SeriesDetail.asp?M=3&B=D1614.Accessed: 18 April 2005]

56 NAA, ‘Series notes for series D1614’.Date unknown,

[http://naa12.naa.gov.au/scripts/SeriesDetail.asp?M=3&B=D1614.Accessed: 18 April 2005]

57 NAA, ‘Series notes for series D1614’.Date unknown,

[http://naa12.naa.gov.au/scripts/SeriesDetail.asp?M=3&B=D1614.Accessed: 18 April 2005].

P a g e | 21

either individually or in association with others’.58 The definition of the term ‘alien’ captured ‘any

person over the age of 16 years other than a person who is a British subject within the meaning of

the Nationality Act 1920‐36’.59

The Nationality Act allowed for migrants to become British subjects through naturalization.

Naturalisation was made more difficult to obtain by non‐white aliens, particularly Japanese

residents. The alien had to have resided in Australia for five years. Even when naturalized, they

were entitled to very few legal rights. Non‐white British subjects were ‘specifically denied

entitlements by provisions in a range of discriminatory legislation’.60 Under the Commonwealth

Immigration Act and the Criminal Act, those who were not born in Australia were still liable to be

deported for ‘treason‐like activities’.61 Because of the racist immigration laws that existed, ‘British

subjecthood was of no benefit to non‐white people in Australia’.62 This was also the case for many

naturalized German and Italian migrants during the war. As Ted Cantle has argued, nationality can

be won or lost, as allegiances change, through exceptional circumstances, or through marriage and

58 Lamidey, Aliens Control, p. 1.

59 Lamidey, Aliens Control: ‘Aliens Classification and Advisory Committee, Interim Report Submitted to The Right

Honourable H.V. Evatt, LL.D., K.C., M.P. The Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Australia’ (1943), p. 5.

60 J. Chersterman, ‘Natural‐Born Subjects? Race and British Subjecthood in Australia.’ Australian Journal of Politics and

History Volume 51, Issue 1, 2005, p. 32. See also The Acts of Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia passed

during the year 1920, in portion of the first session of the eighth parliament of the Commonwealth. Albert J. Mulleti,

Government Printer of the State of Victoria, 1920, p. 146.

61 Chersterman, ‘Natural‐Born Subjects?’, p. 33.

62 Chersterman, ‘Natural‐Born Subjects?’, p. 33.

P a g e | 22

by adoption in respect of children.63 During the Second World War, Australian women who married

German, Italian and Japanese men lost their British nationality.64

The Commonwealth approached the difficult task of trying to protect the nation from enemy

invasion while maintaining the rights of civilians. The National Security Bill was introduced by Prime

Minister Robert Menzies as a national response to Germany’s declaration of war on 3 September:

This Bill is designed to make provision for the safety and defence of the Commonwealth and of its

territories during the present state of war. It is a far reaching measure which gives extensive powers to

the government and in that respect follows the model of legislation with which most honorable

members are already familiar…The unhappy circumstance by which we find ourselves at war… makes it

once more necessary that very great powers should be obtained in order to deal promptly and

effectively with the various problems that will arise in relation to national defence…there must be as

little interference with individual rights as is consistent with concerted national effort.

65

63 T. Cantle, Community Cohesion: A New Framework for Race and Diversity. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005, p.

116.

64 See the Acts of Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia passed during the year 1920, p. 146.

65 Commonwealth, Hansard – Second Reading Speech, House of Representatives, 7 September 1939, 163 (Robert

Gordon Menzies).

Figure 4: Sir Robert Gordon Menzies in 1939

‘Sir Robert Gordon Menzies’. Encyclopedia of

World Biography, 2004.

[http://www.encyclopedia.com/topic/Sir_Robert_

Gordon_Menzies.aspx]. Accessed: 25 March 2012.

P a g e | 23

Author Margaret Bevege wrote ‘even if basic legal rights were potentially suspendable, it does not

follow that legal form was overturned with the outbreak of war. It was not the intention of the

Commonwealth Government, or the Military Board, to act repressively’.66 However, parliamentary

debates regarding the National Security Bill show that the Members of Parliament were aware of

the effects that the legislation would have on minority groups. For example, Labor Member of

Parliament John Solomon Rosevear (Dalley, New South Wales) stated:

We were assured by the Prime Minister yesterday that that we were waging war, not against the

German people, but against the German dictatorship and the Government, yet, if this Bill is passed in its

present form, we shall also be waging war, on a smaller scale, in Australia against many people who, by

the accident of birth, are German. Some of these people may have been naturalised and loyal subjects

of Australia for many years. Yet an open invitation is being offered to smash their businesses and to

deprive them of their worldly goods merely of the say‐so of any officer who may be appointed under the

regulation‐making power under this Bill. But the danger is not confined to enemy subjects. Many

Australian people may be deprived of their worldly goods, and their whole future may be placed in

jeopardy, merely because some official may have a set against them.

67

The election of the Australian Labor Party (ALP) in 1941 did not change the Commonwealth

Governments approach to enemy aliens despite their opposition toward the introduction of the

National Security Bill in 1939. The ALP’s stance against enemy aliens was consistent, especially due

to the heightened security threat to Australia’s north. The Commonwealth Government was well

aware of the potential ramifications of the legislation on minority groups. The most disturbing

comment made during the Second Reading Speech in Parliament that belittled the deprivation of

liberty was made by Member of Parliament Victor Charles Thompson (New England, New South

Wales), who proclaimed:

We know from our experience of the last war that it is absolutely necessary for this Parliament to delegate

a great part of its constitutional powers, which are made constitutional largely by dicta of the High Court,

to the Executive for the time being…I well remember the operation of the War Precautions Act. Although

the legislation was irksome in some respect it did not leave any permanent scars of the feelings of the

66 Bevege, Behind Barbed, p. 27.

67 Commonwealth, Hansard – Second Reading Speech, House of Representatives, 7 September 1939, 173 (John Soloman

Rosevear).

P a g e | 24

people of this country. As soon as the war was over, whatever irritations had been caused by it when

forgotten by the great majority of people.

68

Some historians have excused the Commonwealth’s treatment of enemy aliens in Australia by

comparing the treatment of internees to prisoners of war overseas, or the horrors of concentration

camps. Italian historian Gianfranco Cresciani wrote that

Internment was a trauma both for Italians who were interned and for those who were allowed to retain

their freedom, to pursue a life which could by no means be called normal...in comparative terms, the

material conditions of captivity in Australia were vastly better than those endured by Allied prisoners at

Coltaro, Italy, Colditz,Chengi or Dacheu. The psychological, mental and physical stress of long years of

confinement, isolation and meaningless life left an enduring mark on their characters.

69

Yet, as Cate Elkner wrote

“we were not as bad as genocidal dictators overseas” is weak, as excuses go, and…that beneath the

generality of ‘not too bad’ treatment in a distant sideshow in history’s worst war, real Australian people

suffered needless injustice from petty bureaucracy and small‐minded suspicion.70

This injustice is evidenced in the following chapters presented on German, Italian, Japanese and

Australian‐born women who were married to enemy aliens living in Australia during the Second

World War. Bevege argued that there

was no significant political or press campaign against aliens during World War II. The lack of public

campaign is attributable to the cool‐headedness and commitment to fair play exhibited by the Prime

Ministers, R.G. Menzies and John Curtin, who never engaged in alien baiting themselves, and publicly

68 Commonwealth, Hansard ‐ Second Reading Speech, House of Representatives, 7 September 1939, 176 & 177 (Mr

Thompson).

69 Cresciani, The Italians in Australia, pp. 105 and 111.

70 Elkner et. al., Enemy Aliens, p. iv. The British government have also excused the treatment towards enemy aliens by

referring to the mistreatment of aliens in the United States. T. Kushner referred to an review by Max Betoff of W. Mose

‘If one looks at the treatment by the United States of its citizens of Japanese descent, with no substantial threat of

invasion, the British decision about internment becomes easier to understand’. [T. Kusher, ‘Clubland, Cricket Tests’, p.

79].

P a g e | 25

denounced it in others. They were supported by senior ministers such as P.C. Spender and Dr Evatt. But

internment was not directly in these men’s hands, nor did their attitude make them popular.

71

Bevege may have argued that the internment policy was not in these men’s hands directly, but by

implementing legislation that passed absolute powers to investigative authorities during a time of

crisis, these men can be held accountable for the impact the Aliens Control Regulations had on the

women under study. The inconsistent application of the Aliens Control Regulations towards these

women poses many questions about the administration of justice and the intelligence officers in

charge.

Methodology

This study is based on archival research. Using the NAA online catalogue search function,

documents which were held at the NAA in Sydney, Adelaide, Perth, Brisbane and Canberra were

categorised online and randomly selected on the basis of nationality and women’s names. The

majority of files were examined in Sydney. By 1941, Army officers and the MPI had devised a record

system ‘which was held up as a model for emulation in other states’.72 In New South Wales alone,

records and dossiers were held on more than 12,000 people and firms who provided details on the

large numbers of aliens.73 The dossiers were the responsibility of the MPI authorities until the

Security Service took over in 1942.

The files in this study are primarily from the C123 series held at the NAA in Sydney. The documents

concern unnaturalized enemy aliens living in New South Wales. Alien Applications, Registration

71 Bevege, Behind Barbed Wire, p. 229

72 Coulthard‐Clark, ‘Australia’s Wartime Security Service’, p. 23.

73 Coulthard‐Clark, ‘Australia’s Wartime Security Service’, p. 23.

P a g e | 26

cards and sensitive case files concerning issues of national security and members of the National

Sozialistische Deutsche Arbeiter Partei (NSDAP) in Australia held at the NAA in Adelaide were also

examined (D4878, D4881, and D1915 series). Records from the BP913 and BP25 series created by

the Queensland State Police were examined at the NAA in Brisbane. Passports containing limited

information collected by authorities wereexamined in Melbourne (MP56/10) and Investigation

dossiers concerning internees during the war were examined at the NAA in Perth (K1171 series).

The Japanese women in this study were incarcerated as soon as Japan had entered the war. As a

result, there are not many investigation dossiers that reveal details on their lives, only registration

papers and internee application forms. However, all of the files examined provide an insight in to

the way the Aliens Control Regulations were administered during the war.

In total, over 750 files were examined for this study. Three hundred and sixty of these files had

never before been examined. The documents that were analysed for this study consist of translated

copies of letters, official reports, memorandums and photographs. The translations had been made

at the time of investigation and therefore reflect the information available to the authorities

making decisions. These occasionally contain grammatical errors and I have reproduced them as

recorded. These archival documents and letters reflect the context in which these women lived and

provide an insight into the feelings that were experienced by them, supplying ‘facts, assertions and

responses to experience which cannot easily be found elsewhere’.74

74 D. Fitzpatrick, Oceans of Consolation: Personal Accounts of Irish Migration to Australia. Ithica: Cornell University

Press, 1994, p. 25.

P a g e | 27

While this thesis is in a large part based on archival research, this was supplemented by interviews

where possible. I conducted five interviews which provided information on the context in which

these women lived and their experience of the Aliens Control Regulations. Many women who

experienced the war on the homefront are now well into their 80s or 90s; many are unfortunately

no longer with us. I was fortunate to be able to include some oral testimony in this research,

however, it is important for any author to note that ‘memory’s account of the past is partial or

subjective and that its representations of the past are coloured by the views of the rememberer’.75

In this study, the ‘rememberers’ were women who were growing up during the war and had

recollections of how their family was affected by the legislation. (Most responded to an

advertisement I placed in the Sydney Morning Herald, and the Italian Historical Society Journal, and

to letters addressed to German, Italian and Japanese nursing homes across Australia).

These women included Italian national Josie Ciavola who was an infant during the war when her

family was detained at Fremantle Gaol in June 1940; Yvonne Kraemer who was born in 1940 and

recollects growing up during the war and the stories that were told to her by her parents; and an

Italian‐born woman who chose not to disclose her family name but described her family’s

experience during the war‐time. Three of the interviewees were actually registered as enemy aliens

during the war. These were German‐Jewish refugee Yvonne Kraemer, Austrian Jewish refugee Ilona

Balog, and Francesca Merenda Australian‐born of Italian descent.76 The inclusion of interviews

helps us ‘understand how experience is lived and remembered’.77

75 S. Radstone, ‘Reconceiving Binaries: the Limits of Memory.’ History Workshop Journal, Volume 50, 2005, p.135.

76 Though this research focused solely on German, Italian, Japanese and Australian‐born women, other women of

different nationalities were also interviewed that provided background research into the registration process. This

P a g e | 28

Contemporary Relevance

In addition, it is important to note that this thesis highlights its relevance to contemporary issues.

As historian Eric Hobsbawn has written, for ‘the greater part of history we deal with societies and

communities for which the past is essentially the pattern for the present’.78 It is important that we

learn from the mistakes of the past by recognising the stories presented in this dissertation.

Lamidey wrote in his account of his role in administering the Nation Security Act,

it may also in some minor manner help us all to realise that continued progress by mankind in the search

for peace can be helped considerably by increased knowledge, tolerance and understanding in human

relations rather than by death and destruction caused by the war.

79

Indeed, in recent publications, scholars have related their work on internment to contemporary

issues. These issues include that of Australian citizenship which follows the introduction of the new

Citizenship Test; the release of the Anti‐Terrorism Act 2005 which according to one commentator

has a complete ‘disregard for the civil rights of individuals and the potential for the arbitrary use of

executive power’;80 and the arrival of asylum seekers held in Australian immigration detention

centres.81 The significance of the study of internment is explained by Beaumont in Under Suspicion:

included Romanian Jewish refugee Josie Lacey whose father was conscripted into labour camp during the war and

Czeckoslovakian national Liza Gans who registered as an alien.

77 Radstone, ‘Reconceiving Binaries’, p. 139.

78 E. Hobsbawm, On History. New York: The New Press, 1997,p. 10.

79 Lamidey, Partial Success, p. 5.

80 J. Hocking, ‘Australian Terror Laws: An Historic Critique’. National Forum: The War on Terrorism and the Rule of Law.

New South Wales Parliament, Sydney. 10 November 2003.

[http://www.gtcentre.unsw.edu.au/sites/gtcentre.unsw.edu.au/files/mdocs/88_JennyHocking.pdf] December 2011.

81 See Australian Government, Department of Immigration and Citizenship, ‘Becoming an Australian Citizen’. Date:

unknown, [http://www.citizenship.gov.au/], Accessed: 11 May 2010; I. M. O’Brien, Chapter 9, ‘The Enemy Within:

Wartime internment of enemy Aliens’. M. Crotty and D.A Roberts, et. al., The Great Mistakes of Australian History.

P a g e | 29

it is important because it reminds us, in the age of Guantanamo Bay and rendition, of the ease with

which internment without trial can be accepted by a public that is fearful for its own security’.82

Many historians have argued that most often in times of crisis, the security of the nation overrides

civilian liberties.The treatment of people registered as enemy aliens during the Second World War

can be perceived as not only a ‘phenomenon that arose in the crisis of war, but was part of a much

deeper racist attitude towards aliens which had increased between the wars’.83 According to

Anthony Burke:

Security has been central to the construction of powerful images of national identity and otherness,

and central to their use in bitter political conflicts which were too often resolved in violent and antidemocratic

ways. In short, security has been a potent, driving imperative throughout Australian

history, a fact which ought to give us a pause when we look backwards with an eye to what we are,

and forwards with an eye to what we might become.

84

From the dispossession of Aborigines to the present war against terror, it is clear that the fear of

the ‘alien’ has long existed in Australia’s history and still exists today.

Australia’s xenophobic past was highlighted by Beaumont who wrote that the tragedy of

internment

served to assuage the anxieties of an Australian population who were already predisposed to an

exclusive understanding of citizenship and who, in the crisis of war, turned easily (if temporarily)

against those whose 'crime' was their ethnicity, race or cultural difference.

85

Sydney: University of New South Wales Press, 2006, p. 154; and A. Bashford and C. Strange, ‘Asylum‐Seekers and

National Histories of Detention’. Australian Journal of Politics and History, Volume 48, Issue 4, 2002.

82 Beaumont et. al., Under Suspicion, p. 4.

83 O’Brien, Chapter Two in Elkner et. al., Enemy Aliens, p. 23.

84 A. Burke, In Fear of Security: Australia’s Invasion Anxiety. Sydney: Pluto Press Australia Limited, 2001, p. xxi.

85 Beaumont et. al., Under Suspicion, p. 8.

P a g e | 30

This thesis supports the arguments made by Beaumont, especially when applying them to German,

Italian and Japanese women. Women who were interned show how far ‘reasonable suspicion’ can

be taken, and how the principle of proportionality can be abused by ‘rigid minds closed with

authority’.86 Even women who were not interned were nevertheless subject to restrictions because

of their ethnicity and consequently experienced hardships, especially when looking after family and

family properties. This thesis discusses the experience not only of women who were interned, but

also women who were not interned to illustrate how the Aliens Control Regulations affected their

lives during the war.

Chapter Summaries

This dissertation covers more than 700 German, Italian, Japanese and Australian‐born women living

in Australia during the Second World War. It is divided into three parts. The first part concentrates

on the Aliens Control Regulations and the impact of the outbreak of war. The second section

focuses on case studies of Australian‐born women of German descent, Italian‐born women and

Australian‐born women of Japanese descent who were affected in various ways by the Aliens

Control Regulations. And the third part shows how German‐Jewish refugee and Australian‐born

women, were affected by war‐time legislation.

Part I consists of two chapters. Chapter One discusses the rule of law – the context and legislation

that existed during the outbreak of war. It provides the context in which these women lived, in

particular the war hysteria and the reaction from the Commonwealth Government and the public

towards Italy’s entry into the war in 1940. A brief summary on Australia’s war‐time security service

86 Crotty and Roberts, The Great Mistakes, p. 155.

P a g e | 31

will also be presented. The focal point of the chapter is the Aliens Control Regulations, providing an

analysis of the restrictions imposed by the Aliens Control Regulations that affected Italian women

during the Second World War in New South Wales.

Germany declared war in September 1939 and German men who had been investigated by

authorities in the period leading up to the war were rounded up to be interned. However, Italy’s

entry into the war in June 1940 was perceived by the media and Australian public as a more

treacherous invasion because of its unexpected entry into the war. Chapter Two focuses on the

capture of the Italian vessels the Remo and the Romolo in Australian waters in June 1940. Very little

information is available on the seizure of these vessels, though my research has uncovered NAA

documents concerning women on board the vessels, who were, in spite of Cresciani’s reports to the

contrary, interned during the war. These women were returning to Italy and some were members

of the Fascist Party.

Part II focuses on other women who became more isolated and experienced financial difficulty

while their husbands were interned; and some women, especially Australian‐born women of

Japanese descent, real or otherwise, were interned and placed under severe restrictions based

solely on their racial appearance. German and Italian women were the largest group of aliens

residing in Australia registered as enemy aliens during the war. Despite the fact there are not many

files on Japanese women because of the low population of Japanese in Australia, I chose to include

Japanese women in the study because I wanted to draw comparisons with the other groups, and

show how war‐time policy changed as the war progressed. The inclusion of Asians also allows the

investigation of racist issues such as appearance – looking Japanese.

P a g e | 32

Part II consists of three chapters that distinguish the inconsistent ways that the Aliens Control

Regulations were applied focusing on German, Italian and Australian‐born women of Japanese

descent. Chapter Three draws attention to Australian‐born German women who maintained the

cultural values of their German heritage and in some cases were ardent supporters of Nazism. It is

important to differentiate the various types of German women examined in this chapter. There are

five categories of ‘German’ that fell under the classification of enemy aliens and were investigated

during the Second World War: Australian‐born women who were German by descent and long term

settlers; Australian‐born women married to German nationals; German‐born women who migrated

to Australia during the years preceding the war; German Jewish‐born refugees who fled Nazi

Germany just before the outbreak of war; and as evidenced in Chapter Six, Hungarian and Austrian

born refugees were also placed under the classification of German enemy aliens due to the Nazi

occupation of their native countries.

As noted in Chapter Three, the NAA files in South Australia confirm that there were official female

members of the NSDAP who were placed under surveillance by authorities. This chapter shows how

the Aliens Control Regulations were inconsistently applied, especially when the head of the

Women’s Nazi Organization in South Australia, Pauline Starke, was considered a threat to national

security by authorities yet was never interned during the war. The role of women in the Nazi Party

activities in Australia seemed to be neglected in Gary Gumpl and Richard Kleinig’s recently released

book The Rise and Fall of Australia's No. 1 Nazi.87 Interestingly, Hermann Homburg’s daughter Rita

Krawinkle appears in this chapter, as one of the few women placed under surveillance by

87 See Gumpl and Kleinig, The Rise and Fall of Australia's No. 1 Nazi.

P a g e | 33

investigative authorities. Nazi party membership was relatively low and most women in this

chapter associated with the Nazi Party were also socially prominent in the South Australian German

community.

Chapter Four focuses on how the Aliens Control Regulations were applied to Italian women who

were not interned, but who nevertheless suffered from the negative impact the Aliens Control

Regulations had on their lives. Male relatives, who were also the main income earners, were placed

in internment camps. As a result, many women experienced significant economic distress and were

left to fend for themselves. Italian women were mainly involved in domestic duties and in many

cases, left to take care of both their homes and businesses formerly run by male relatives. Some

experienced loss of property due to the fact they could no longer support themselves and their

children. Other security measures these women endured under the Aliens Control Regulations

included the restriction on travel and movement, the Prohibited Possessions Order 1940 (Cth) which

placed restrictions on owning particular items, and restrictions placed on employment, assembly

and propaganda. Legislation impacted on these women socially. They became isolated as a result of

their husbands being interned and the registration process which categorised them as the ‘enemy’.

The Australian public and media intensified the matter when malicious accusations were also made

against Italians.

Chapter Five concerns Japanese women and Australian‐born women of Japanese descent who were

interned because of their Asian appearance. Though this dissertation does not go into great detail

about Japanese women due to the low population of Japanese living in Australia during the war, it

was clear that the Commonwealth Government found it difficult to intern them on political

P a g e | 34

grounds. There was no 'Japanese equivalent of the NSDAP or Fascist Party therefore an individual's

commitment to Japan's war activities was not openly proclaimed'.88 There were, however, Japanese

clubs and societies that many Japanese were affiliated with. During the war, Japan was perceived

by Allied forces to be a ‘racial menace’.89 Japan’s role in the war was seen as more of a religious and

cultural war rather than a political one.90 The significance of including this chapter shows how race

influenced the decisions made by authorities to intern Japanese born migrants living in Australia.

After the bombing of Pearl Harbour, all Japanese were immediately interned without being further

investigated. Nagata’s published work Unwanted Aliens: Japanese Internment in Australia provided

accounts of the war‐time experience of Japanese men and women based on oral testimonies and

archival documents.91 The women in my study were interned not because of their ethnicity or

formal citizenship status but because of their Japanese appearance. Authorities thought it best to

intern these women for their own and for public safety. The discrimination and treatment towards

the Japanese reinforces the notion that other historians have expressed, that their treatment was a

reflection of what was happening overseas.92 Nagata interviewed Lamidey, who told her ‘our

government was firm about the Japanese. As far as I remember, we interned the lot and, as a

principle, we didn't intend to let anyone out. It was for their protection'.93

88 Saunders and Taylor, ‘The Enemy Within’, p. 23.

89 See J. Dower, War Without Mercy: Race and Power in the Pacific War. New York: Pantheon Books, 1986.

90 Dower, War without Mercy, p. 7.

91 Nagata, Unwanted Aliens.

92 I. M. O’Brien, Chapter 9, ‘The Enemy Within: Wartime internment of enemy Aliens’ in Crotty, Great Mistakes, p. 141

93 Beaumont et. al., Under suspicion, p. 121.

P a g e | 35

The final chapters contained in Part III, are strategically placed last to show the bureaucratic failures

and inconsistent ways in which the Aliens Control Regulations were applied to German‐Jewish

Refugees and Australian‐born women married to Italian migrants. Chapter Six illustrates how the

legislation impacted on the lives of German‐Jewish women living in Australia during the war. It

discusses the poor judgement that was made by police and military officers carrying out the Aliens

Control Regulations and the inability of the government to determine who was a genuine Jewish

refugee. Many of these people came to Australia fleeing Nazi persecution, but were nevertheless

classified as the ‘enemy’ along with their ‘enemies’, the Nazi sympathizers. Though they were not

prosecuted under the legislation like their Italian counterparts, German‐Jewish women still endured

the same restrictions and processes as enemy aliens, and in some cases were affected by the

legislation socially and economically. Many women also fell victim to malicious statements made by

members of the community who regarded them with suspicion simply because they spoke German.

Once again, appearance – appearing to be German ‐ overrode reality and the subtlety of identity.

Chapter Seven is concerned with Australian‐born women married to Italian men, unaware that they

had lost their British nationality as a result of their marriage. In order to regain their British status,

these women had to prove to authorities that they had no sympathy towards any of the countries

which were at war with the Allied forces, especially their husband’s homeland. An amendment

made to the Nationality Act in 1935 provided the opportunity for women to retain their British

nationality. Part IV, Division 1 (18) of the Nationality Act, clearly stated that women who were

married to an alien or enemy alien could make a declaration in order to retain their British

P a g e | 36

nationality if they desired to do so.94 The case studies presented in this chapter are fascinating

stories of Australian women who were caught up in war‐time legislation and it is important to note

their significance of their plight in Australia’s history – stories that have been neglected for over

seventy years.

Conclusion

There has been a considerable amount of research undertaken on issues concerning internment

and migration in Australia. However, there has been very little research carried out on the

thousands of aliens who were not interned. We know very little about the experience of women

who fall into the alien or enemy alien categories. In particular, little work has been done on the

impact of the Aliens Control Regulations on the lives of German, Italian and Japanese women living

in Australia during the Second World War. This thesis aims to fill these gaps.

94 The Acts of Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia passed during the year 1920, p. 146.

PART I:

OUTBREAK OF WAR

Figure 5: Oil painting by Frank Norton depicting the Italian Romolo on fire in 1942. The

Italian Cruiser was captured by authorities in Australian waters in June 1940.

  1. Norton, HMAS Manoora sinking merchant vessel Romolo. Oil on hardboard, 1942.

Australian War Memorial, [http://cas.awm.gov.au/item/ART22328]. Accessed: 25 March

2012.

P a g e | 38

Chapter One:

The Rule of Law

…however much we may cherish the Rule of Law as one of our most precious possessions, we must

recognize that permanent liberty is often best achieved only by a temporary sacrifice of individual

freedom.1

(Robert Gordon Menzies, 1917)

Arbitrary process can be characterized as ‘different officials [taking]…different views upon whether

or not the internment of a person was justified in a particular instance’.2 The focus of this thesis is

the arbitrary nature of the National Security (Aliens Control) Regulations 1939 (Cth) apparent in the

various ways that German, Italian, Japanese and Australian‐born women were affected by war‐time

legislation. The future Australian Prime Minister, Robert Gordon Menzies, acknowledged just

before the end of the First World War that the rule of law was ‘the complete negation of arbitrary

power or any very extended use of prerogative right’ and believed that the War Precautions Act

1914 (Cth) enacted during the war was a ‘challenge to the rule of law’.3 Menzies claimed that the

Act was ‘a virtual suspension of one of the fundamental provisions of the Magna Charter’.4 Despite

his acknowledgement of the loss of civilian rights during war‐time, the opening passage of this

chapter shows that in 1917 Menzies was conflicted over the justification of war‐time legislation.

Nevertheless, over twenty years later, as the Prime Minister of Australia, Menzies declared war on

Germany on 3 September 1939 and introduced the National Security Act 1939 (Cth) which passed

absolute power to the Executive.

1 R. G. Menzies, The Rule of Law during the War. Sydney: The Law Book Co. of Australiasia Ltd, 1917, p. 24.

2 P. McDermott, ‘Internment during the Great War – A Challenge to the Rule of Law’. University of New South Wales

Law Journal, Volume 28, Issue 2, 2005, p. 331.

3 Menzies, The Rule of Law in McDermott, ‘Internment during the Great War’, p. 334.

4 McDermott, ‘Internment during the Great War’, p. 332. Clause 39 stated ‘no free man shall be…imprisoned except by

the lawful judgment of his equals or by the law of the land’. [McDermott, ‘Internment during the Great War’, p. 332].

P a g e | 39

This chapter will provide background information on the Aliens Control Regulations that were

promulgated under the National Security Act. It will examine the Aliens Control Regulations that

affected the lives of German, Italian, Japanese and certain Australian‐born women living in

Australia. The registration and naturalization process proved to be most problematic, especially for

Australian‐born women who lost their nationality as a result of their marriage to an enemy alien.

Other key areas that will be examined include the internment process, restrictions placed on travel

and movement, limited employment opportunities and the Prohibited Possessions Order 1939

(Cth). Changes that were made to legislation as the war progressed and the inconsistencies that

existed among officials who administered the Aliens Control Regulations will also be highlighted.

However, before we begin, it is important to consider that the introduction of the National Security

Act was not the first time the Commonwealth Government introduced national security measures.

The Development of a War‐time Security Service

The legal definition of ‘national security’ is the ‘protection of a nation and of the people of a nation

from espionage, sabotage…violence, attacks on the nation’s defence system or acts of foreign

interference’.5 Joan Beaumont wrote

in times of national crisis, external threats can rapidly breed unitary constructions of ‘the nation’. The

sense of a community, bound together by common values, beliefs and cultural practices, can fracture.

Societies divide along fault lines, and the consensus that holds a multicultural or pluralistic citizenry

together crumbles in the face of fear, anger, the desire for revenge and the demonising of those who

are different.6

In times of crisis, communities often break down due to the unwarranted discrimination against

ethnic minorities that follows. This is what happened in Australia at the outbreak of the Second

World War. An Australian politician who was later to become Immigration Minister, Arthur Calwell

5 P. Nygh and P. Butt, Butterworths Concise Australian Legal Dictionary. Sydney: Butterworths, 1998, p. 299.

6 J. Beaumont, ‘Australian Citizenship and the Two World Wars’. Australian Journal of Politics and History, Volume 53,

Issue 2, 2007, p. 172.

P a g e | 40

justified the Commonwealth Government’s actions to control aliens by claiming that while the war

continued, the control of aliens was necessary, ‘for war as the democracies wage it is largely an

affair of improvisation, and in urgent situations which demand prompt and effective action there is

little time to weigh the niceties of human rights’.7 However, the Second World War was not the first

time Australia had introduced war‐time Aliens Control Regulations that affected the homefront,

where the notion of law becomes ‘nothing other than an expression of will by a political superior’.8

As evidenced in the Introduction, legislation implemented during the Second World War was just

one of many policies in Australia’s war‐time history when national security has overridden civilian

liberties. As discussed by author Jason Byrnes:

The majority of Australians would be unaware of the long historical links between national security issues

including the threat of terrorism and the AFP…indeed, most of the critical developments in federal policing

have occurred either as a result of, or within the context of, periods of significant national security threats.

9

This thesis supports the argument made by British jurist and constitutional theorist, Albert Venn

Dicey, that ‘the development of administrative agencies [was the]… main threat to the rule of

law’.10 Dicey, whose work was described as ‘highly influential throughout the [British] Empire’,

referred to the leading authority in constitutional law, Professor W. Harrison Moore, who professed

that ‘executive authority is not above, but below the rule of law’.11

The risk to national security has always been a vital concern for the Commonwealth Government.

Beaumont has argued that the war:

7 N. Lamidey, Aliens Control in Australia 1939‐46. Sydney: N. Lamidey, 1974, p. 1.

8 McDermott, ‘Internment during the Great War’, p. 332.

9 J. Byrnes, ‘Warwick incident anniversary’, Platypus Magazine, Volume 96, September 2007, p. 33.

10 McDermott, ‘Internment during the Great War’, p. 334.

11 McDermott, ‘Internment during the Great War’, pp. 331 and 332.

P a g e | 41

shifts the balance of rights and obligations towards the state at the expense of the individual. Faced with

external threats, the state can demand that the citizen be prepared to die in the name of the nation,

while invoking national security interests to justify restrictions of civil rights and basic freedoms.

12

One of the periods of significant national threat included the First World War. The first few months

of the First World War saw Germany plan to re‐take the lost German colony, New Guinea, which

would be used for the renewal of operations in the Pacific. Consequently, the Australian supply

route to Europe and the rest of the Commonwealth was threatened.13 The fear of Germany taking

Australia from the north was a public concern, and as a result, the vision of an internal enemy arose

on the homefront.14 The Commonwealth Government responded to the German threat by

introducing the War Precautions Act which targeted Germans living in Australia. However, Germans

were not the only enemy aliens affected by the legislation.

The enemy alien population also included Irish nationalists, radical pacifists and socialists, unionists,

political and church leaders who campaigned against conscription, and ‘practically…everybody who

dared to speak out publicly against the Commonwealth Government’s total commitment to war’.15

The Aliens Restriction Orders were introduced in May 1915 and in 1916. The orders were

implemented to allow the deportation of an unnaturalized alien without a hearing. In 1917, Prime

Minister William Hughes began a campaign to destroy the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW)

and passed two Unlawful Association Acts which allowed for foreign and even British radicals who

12 Beaumont, ‘Australian Citizenship’, p. 171.

13 G. Fischer, Enemy Aliens: Internment and the Homefront Experience in Australia 1914‐1920. St. Lucia, University of

Queensland Press, 1989, p. 1.

14 Fischer, Enemy Aliens, p. 4.

15 Fischer, Enemy Aliens, p. 75.

P a g e | 42

were not Australian‐born to be expelled and deported to their country of origin.16 Kay Saunders

wrote that the alien carried the double burden of foreign birth and radicalism and refers to the

‘conservative theory that foreigners were more dangerously extreme’ than people native born.17

The First World War saw significant development in national security operations. During the war,

the Commonwealth feared an open domestic revolution, due to the political dissidents who were

protesting against the Commonwealth Government’s introduction of military conscription. Author

Frank Cain wrote that it was ‘in those years of social and political ferment that the factors which led

to the setting up of Australian surveillance organizations can best be observed and analyzed’.18

Hughes faced large crowds protesting against the pending referendum on the issue. In November

1917, local radicals (‘scallywags’) threw two eggs at Hughes and knocked his hat off.19 This would

eventually become known as the ‘Warwick incident’ and paved way for the development of a wartime

security service. The Army was responsible for censorship in each state while the Counter

Espionage Bureau (CEB), the Commonwealth Police Force (CPF) and the State Police forces were

established to assist in countering espionage against Britain’s war effort and carrying out directions

from the Attorney General (See Appendix Two).20

16 K. Saunders and R. Daniels et. al., Alien Justice: Wartime Internment in Australia and North America. St. Lucia:

University of Queensland Press, 2000, p. 30 and 32.

17 Saunders and Daniels et. al., Alien Justice, p. 31.

18 F. Cain, The Origins of Political Surveillance in Australia. Melbourne: Angus & Robertson Publishers, 1983, p. vii.

19 Byrnes, ‘Warwick incident’, p. 34.

20 Cain, Origins of Political Surveillance, pp. ix – x.

P a g e | 43

A total of 6,890 Germans were interned as a result of the War Precautions Act. About 4,500

Germans of this total were residents of Australia prior to 1914 and 700 Germans were in fact

naturalized British subjects.21 Registration and parole of all aliens was also required under the War

Precautions Act, and regarding other restrictions, it was up to local police officers to prosecute

enemy aliens as they saw fit.22

The structure within the surveillance organization continued to change throughout the interwar

period. In 1919, intelligence services were dismantled and all military responsibilities which

21 Fischer, Enemy Aliens, p. 77.

22 Fischer, Enemy Aliens, p. 75.

Figure 6: Cartoon depicting the Warwick incident

  1. Donovan, Changing the Guard: A History of the

Australian Protective Service. Canberra: Australian

Government Publishing Service, 1994, p. 4.

Figure 7: Prime Minister William ‘Billy’ Hughes

NAA, ‘William Morris Hughes – Fact sheet 73’.

http://www.naa.gov.au/collection/factsheets/

fs73.aspx]. Accessed: 25 March 2012).

P a g e | 44

consisted of watching over radicals were passed onto the CEB staffed entirely by civilians.23

Hostilities towards foreigners who resided in Australia continued to exist among the Australian

public. However, in 1929, the arrival of the Depression caused the economy to contract and

Australian politics to become paralyzed.24

It was during this period that the Commonwealth Government had ‘assumed immense economic

and political powers’ which would eventually pave the way for the establishment of a more

centralized security intelligence organization during the Second World War.25 Security was seen as

‘an effective tool in the management of industrial populations, social order and economic

prosperity’.26 The Australian Labor Party’s vision was to establish an order in ‘which domestic

reconstruction would merge with the international creation of a permanent system of security’.27

During the First World War, Hughes waged a war against anyone who opposed the Commonwealth

Government during the conflict. Ironically, as Attorney General in 1939, Hughes held the highest

power responsible for the implementation of the Aliens Control Regulations in regard to the Second

World War. Memories of the power wielded by the Commonwealth during the First World War

impacted on later debates in Parliament. During the Second Reading Speech of the National

Security Bill 1939 (Cth), Member of Parliament Hubert Peter Lazzarini (Werriwa, New South Wales),

who was perhaps concerned by the implications the legislation would have on the Italian

23 Cain, Origins of Political Surveillance, p. 41.

24 A. Burke, In Fear of Security: Australia’s Invasion Anxiety. Sydney: Centrum, 2001, p. 54.

25 Cain, Origins of Political Surveillance, p. 188.

26 Burke, In Fear of Security, p. 53.

27 Burke, In Fear of Security, p. 78.

P a g e | 45

community in Australia, proclaimed that no power should be given to the Attorney General,

especially after Hughes’ actions against civilians during the previous war:

We know that it will be invoked by the Government to shut up the Parliament and to govern the

country by regulation… I do not want to see again in this country the turmoil that existed when the

present Attorney General (Mr Hughes) was Prime Minister and strutting about the country, deliberately

made his irritating speeches, magnified the Warwick egg incident, traduced men with whom he had

been associated for years and invoked the War Precautions Act in order to railroad men to gaol. No one

can forget that; it is embedded too deeply in the minds of the people. I am not prepared to give him

any power at all; he is one man whom I will not trust an inch with any power, because he has a brain

that immediately becomes inflamed by the acquisition of a little authority. It is a good job that he has

not the powers that Hitler has in Germany. I believe that the democrats of this country will re‐echo the

statements which I have made to‐day.28

On the other hand, support for the National Security Bill was summed up by Member of Parliament

Victor Charles Thompson, whose statement quoted earlier in the Introduction, highlighted the

fundamental notion of national security overriding civilian liberty:

We know from our experience of the last war that it is absolutely necessary for this Parliament to delegate

a great part of its constitutional powers, which are made constitutional largely by dicta of the High Court,

to the Executive for the time being…I well remember the operation of the War Precautions Act. Although

the legislation was irksome in some respect it did not leave any permanent scars of the feelings of the

people of this country. As soon as the war was over, whatever irritations had been caused by it when

forgotten by the great majority of people.29

Margaret Bevege claimed that the opening of the Second World War found Australia unprepared to

deal with questions of national security because no national corporate body on security existed.30

The Security Service was formed on 31 March 1941 as part of the Attorney‐General’s Department

and was headed by Deputy Director of the Commonwealth Investigation Branch (CIB), Lieutenant

Colonel E.E. Longfield Lloyd, who established his headquarters in nine rooms at the Patents Office

28 Commonwealth, Hansard – Second Reading Speech, House of Representatives, 8 September 1939, 204 (Mr Lazzarini).

29 Commonwealth, Hansard – Second Reading Speech, House of Representatives, 7 September 1939, 176 & 177 (Mr

Thompson).

30 M. Bevege, Behind Barbed Wire: Internment in Australia during World War II. St. Lucia: University of Queensland

Press, 1993, p. 1.

P a g e | 46

in Canberra.31 This organization took over civil national security duties and internal securities that

were previously controlled by the Army.32

The Army retained the responsibility for censorship and all matters concerned with internment. The

executive power to deal with subversive activities was still vested in the Attorney General, while

the control over aliens rested with the generals commanding the Military Districts in each state.33 In

preparation for becoming a more centralized organization, an interdepartmental committee

investigated the idea of setting up a Defence Security Organization (DSO). It was concluded by the

majority of the committee members that ‘as Defence in any event required an organization to

ensure the security of defence works, efficiency and economy was best served by Army

undertaking primary responsibility’.34 The War Cabinet approved the DSO on 5 June 1940 to

operate for three services under the direct control of the Chief of General staff. The DSO liaised

with the CIB, State Police and other civil authorities.35

The Army retained control over civil and internal security in Northern Territory and Western

Australia’s north (see Appendix Three for a diagram of the organizational structure of Australia’s

war‐time security service during the Second World War).36 According to Chris Coulthard–Clark, as

‘the likelihood of war increased, Army officers were placed full‐time in Police Headquarters and

directed the work of the Police Commissioner [of the] Military Police Intelligence Section’.37 The

31 Coulthard‐Clark, ‘Australia’s Wartime Security Service’, p. 24.

32 Coulthard‐Clark, ‘Australia’s Wartime Security Service’, p. 24.

33 Coulthard‐Clark, ‘Australia’s Wartime Security Service’, p. 24.

34 Coulthard‐Clark, ‘Australia’s Wartime Security Service’, p. 23.

35 Coulthard‐Clark, ‘Australia’s Wartime Security Service’, pp. 23 and24.

36 Coulthard‐Clark, ‘Australia’s Wartime Security Service’, p. 24.

37 Coulthard‐Clark, ‘Australia’s Wartime Security Service’, p. 23.

P a g e | 47

role of the MPI was to enforce the Aliens Control Regulations targeted at all aliens and enemy

aliens living in Australia.

The Aliens Control Regulations were introduced as an important means to control aliens and enemy

aliens. According to Noel Lamidey, the legislation

carried with it the highly contentious and difficult task of striking a proper balance between the

implementation of Government instructions to be ever watchful of the security of the nation and the

feeling that this be done with as little oppression or harshness as the emergency of war permitted.38

However, perhaps unsurprisingly, the Aliens Control Regulations had a negative impact upon the

lives of aliens and were always controversial. As Lamidey argued, for some, the restrictions were

‘carried out without due regard to humanity and social justice’, while others argued that the

‘successful prosecution of the war justified any action that was taken’.39

In the five years immediately before the war, over 9,000 German nationals had migrated to

Australia, along with 10,000 Italians, and about 20,000 other continental Europeans, many of whom

were refugees from Nazi or fascist rule.40 Even at this early stage, Australians seemed unable to

understand the difference between refugees from enemy states and supporters of them. There

were some refugees who were refused settlement in Australia. For example, a steamer from Berlin

that was to make a special passage to Australia was cancelled ‘because of the unfavourable

reaction to the proposal in Australia’.41 According to Saunders, once the war began ‘Australian

society became obsessively intent upon identifying and punishing those perceived to be potentially

38 Lamidey, Aliens Control, p. 1.

39 Lamidey, Aliens Control, p. 1.

40 P. Hasluck, The Government and the People, 1939‐1941. Volume One. Canberra: Australian War Memorial, 1952, p.

593.

41 ‘Australia to admit Jew Refugees’.. The Courier Mail, 23 November 1938, p. 1.

P a g e | 48

undermining national security, the war effort or morale’.42 Similar to what had occurred during the

First World War, restrictions were not only placed on enemy aliens living in Australia, but also on

other groups, such as members of the Communist Party of Australia (CPA) and the Australian First

Movement.43 Saunders claimed that a dominant function of the modern State during the war was

the ‘identification, targeting and containment of groups who ‘were perceived as threats to the

security, morale and the physical, moral and ideological well‐being and cohesiveness of the society

under external threat’.44 This was especially evident in regard to the ‘alien’, who represented the

embodiment of all fears, particularly those espousing ‘foreign’ ideologies like fascism.45

The main objective of the Aliens Control Regulations was ‘to ensure that aliens, resident in

Australia, enemy and otherwise, could in no way become a danger to the country nor impede the

progress of the war either individually or in association with others’.46 When war first broke out,

Germans were registered as enemy aliens while Italians and Japanese living in Australia were

classified simply as aliens.47 For the second time round, Germans in Australia fell victim to

restrictions placed on enemy aliens during war‐time.

42 K. Saunders, War on the Homefront: State intervention in Queensland 1938‐1948. Queensland, St. Lucia: University

Queensland Press, 1993, p. 33.

43 Saunders, War on the Homefront, p. 19.

44 Saunders, War on the Homefront, p. 33.

45 Saunders, War on the Homefront, p. 33.

46 Saunders, War on the Homefront, p. 33.

47 It was not until Italy and Japan entered the war later on that Italians and Japanese living in Australia were reclassified

as enemy aliens and further investigated or incarcerated.

P a g e | 49

Registration Act 1939 (Cth)

The Aliens Control Regulations introduced during the Second World War targeted minority groups,

categorizing non‐British migrants living in Australia as aliens and enemy aliens. This prevented any

form of assimilation for most minority groups living in Australia at the time. Eleanor Venables wrote

the ‘issue of belonging and not belonging is paradoxical. Where and when does an immigrant begin

to ‘belong’? The ‘new’ society seems to demand belonging of you but, paradoxically, seems also to

block each attempt’.48 As evidenced in Appendix One, each foreign national was classified as either

an alien or enemy alien. This table was recommended by the Aliens Classification Advisory

Committee (ACAC) and established under the direction of the new Director General Simpson.

The registration of enemy aliens was administered by the Security Service, who ‘took measures to

register, photograph and fingerprint every alien’.49 Enemy aliens were expected to register at their

local police station according to a schedule organized alphabetically. For example, on 15 September

1939, newspapers announced that ‘Italians whose names start with the letters K, L and M are asked

to report at the Police Station’.50 In some cases, women provided their own photographs. Police

and military officers located at the local police station were responsible for enforcing the Aliens

Control Regulation. All aliens were required to complete a questionnaire form in triplicate and take

it to the nearest police station. Four photographs of them, one attached to the application form,

were to be handed into an Aliens Registration Officer (ARO), along with a certificate of registration

and passport. A certificate of registration and passport was also required to be handed in to the

48 E. Venables, ‘Recollection of Identity: The Reassembly of the Migrant.’ Sojourners and Strangers, Journal of Australian

Studies, Volume 77, 2003, p. 114.

49 Lamidey, Aliens Control: ‘A Report to the Honourable Arthur A. Calwell H.P. Minister for Immigration upon some

Aspects of Aliens Control in Australia During Time of War, 1947’, p. 6.

50 ‘Registration of Enemy Aliens’. Barrier Miner, 15 September 1939, p. 3.

P a g e | 50

ARO. Clause 5 (4) of the Aliens Control Regulations stated that ‘Regulations may require the alien to

allow a print of his fingers or thumbs’.51

There was some difficulty, however, in communicating the Aliens Control Regulations to most

enemy aliens. The questionnaire forms were distributed by police and it was up to the enemy aliens

themselves to provide completed forms and photographs to their local police stations. It was

reported by the Barrier Miner in September 1939, that ‘Comprehensive details are taken from the

aliens and the officers’ work was hampered by the fact that several of them [aliens] have a slight

knowledge of English’.52 Though it was common knowledge that enemy aliens knew very little

English, they were still expected to follow up on the Aliens Control Regulations. It was reported by

Inspector Duckworth that the ‘public who were affected by the regulations should, in their own

interests, ascertain the precise requirements of the regulations from the nearest police station’.53

Authorities issued warnings to those who had failed to register. On 14 December 1939, there was a

small proportion of aliens who failed to register in Western Australia. Authorities announced that

those ‘who failed to report for registration, or enemy aliens who did not give their parole,

subjected themselves to internment’.54

During the war, hundreds of aliens reported to police stations where fingerprints were taken. It was

‘considered necessary as a check upon the identity of the aliens in the future’ (See Appendix

51 National Security (Aliens Control) Regulations, Statutory Rules 1939, No. 88. (m) taken out of Statutory rules made

under Commonwealth Acts During the Year 1939. Also Perogative Orders, etc., with Tables and Index. L. F. Johnston,

Commonwealth Government Printer, Canberra, 1939, p. 408.

52 ‘Registration of Enemy Aliens’. Barrier Miner, 15 September 1939, p. 3.

53 ‘

Make a free website with Yola