32[“The Treatment of Aborigines”, The West Australian, Saturday 16 April 1904, page 7, http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article25086110]

THE TREATMENT OF ABORIGINES.

BISHOP GIBNEY’s CHARGES.

REPLY BY MR. PRINSEP.

Mr. H. C. Prinsep, the Chief Protector of Aborigines, was interviewed yesterday on the subject of the charges made by Bishop Gibney in regard to the alleged ill-treatment of natives in the North-West some years ago.

“These charges of cruelty,” said Mr. Prinsep, “are based upon stories which are now fading into the dim past. Bishop Gibney’s past experience of the natives, and possibly a slight knowledge of them in late years, has led him to recommend what cannot be otherwise than a good system for the future. I quite agree with him, provided that the money were supplied with which to carry it out. It would be of no use attempting to carry out such a big scheme in a partial manner. When done, it must be done thoroughly. In the opinion of some people who have great weight in the Legislature, the idea of confining natives to reserves would be an even more difficult work than that of stopping the rabbit invasion; but I say that there would he no harm in trying, for the experiment is well worth the expenditure of a little money.

“Bishop Gibney has alluded to Dr. Roth, of Queensland, and I may say that I have been in most friendly communication with that gentleman for some time, and I am doing my best to introduce his Queensland system here. For some years I have been endeavouring to get further legislation considered by Parliament, and a number of the sections of the proposed new Bill were drafted from suggestions made by Dr. Roth. The establishment of protectors in each of our northern districts would be of great value to the natives, but one man could not do it. I certainly doubt whether Broome would be the best position for the protector’s headquarters. The Catholic mission there should be of sufficient influence under the admirable management of Father Walter to keep at least that part of the district free from contamination, and well protected as far as the natives are concerned. Bishop Gibney does not appear to think, as I do, that the natives have to be protected from the consequence of their vices and their dispositions as much as against those of the white people. If the race is to be saved, a certain amount of domination will have to be visible in our future legislation. A fine race such as they are are well worth saving for the future benefit of our northern districts. However, it is a good thing that the question is being well thrashed out, and although I may not know so much about it as Bishop Gibney, he need not distress himself by thinking that I do not give my earnest attention to the matter. I can assure him that I shall do so as long as I am entrusted with the work.

“The Department has already tried a close inspection of the condition of the natives on the various stations in nearly every part of the State, by their travelling superintendent, Mr. Olivey. Although that gentleman’s reports have been of the greatest service, and have shown in a general way that there are very few instances in which natives are actually treated cruelly, the futility of surprise visits has been shown. Everyone knows when the inspector is about, and though we have no reason to believe that any special preparations are made on there occasions, still a settler could easily take such precautions if he desired to do so. There is no doubt that if any particular cruelty existed nowadays someone would talk about it. It would get to the ears of the police, and would be inquired into. For years past the Department has been trying to get further legislation on the aborigines question. The sections of the Bill meet nearly every case mentioned by Bishop Gibney, and lately it has only been by unavoidable stress of circumstances that Parliament has not had the Bill before it. It is hoped, however, that there will be little further delay in having the measure considered. If passed, the Bill will be of a far-reaching character, and will leave little opportunity for evilly-disposed persons to ill-treat natives or to lead them astray in any way without being subjected to a severe penalty.”

AB notes:

Prinsep gives support to the idea of the Queensland legislation being replicated in Western Australia.

In about 1908, when Gale replaced Prinsep as Chief Protector, Prinsep was widely criticised for having been ineffective in the role.