Fanatic Heart: John Boyle O’Reilly

John Boyle O’Reilly’s Mountjoy mugshot in 1866.

Thomas Francis Meagher and John Mitchel were not the only 19th century Irish revolutionaries to make their mark on Australia and America. Among those they inspired was County Meath man John Boyle O’Reilly. Like Meagher and Mitchel, O’Reilly was transported to Australia for conspiring in rebellion. Like Meagher and Mitchel, he escaped to America, and like Meagher and Mitchel, O’Reilly became one of the most important Irishmen in America. According to A.G. Evans’ biography Fanatic Heart, O’Reilly is remembered in Ireland as a patriot and poet, in Australia as a convict who made a daring escape, and in America as a journalist, poet and philanthropist.

John Boyle O’Reilly was born in 1844 in the shadow of the Boyne river near Drogheda. His home village Dowth is the site of a megalithic passage tomb of similar vintage to nearby Newgrange. Schoolteacher William O’Reilly married Eliza Boyle in Dublin before he took over Dowth national school. John was their third child. At his father’s feet John learned about Cromwell’s massacre of Drogheda, and the Battle of the Boyne at nearby Oldbridge. Ireland suffered an even bigger tragedy as John toddled around the house. The potato crop failed in 1845, then again in 1846, and a third time in 1848. Thanks to poverty, disease and British government negligence, one million people died while another million emigrated. The O’Reillys survived on William’s wages though it turned young John into a lifelong “implacable enemy” of England.

His older brother William was an apprentice at the Drogheda Argus. When William contracted tuberculosis, John took his place, aged 11. John spent four years at the Argus but was forced out after the proprietor died in 1859. The family sent John to Preston, Lancashire where his mother’s sister had married an Englishman. Preston was a Catholic town and O’Reilly enjoyed four years there, working at the Preston Guardian. After 12 months he enlisted with the 11th Lancashire Rifle Volunteers amid talk of a possible war with France. O’Reilly became interested in Irish history and returned to Dublin in 1863, as rumours of Fenian rebellion convulsed Ireland.

O’Reilly enlisted as a trooper in the 10th Hussars in Dublin, not as a potential agent provocateur but simply because he “liked soldering”. The Fenians appointed John Devoy to seek recruits from the army. Devoy estimated 8000 members of the Irish Republican Brotherhood were among 26,000 troops in Ireland. Devoy sought out O’Reilly as a popular member of the Hussars and enlisted him to the movement. With the American civil war ending, Fenian leader James Stephens said 1865 would be the year of action. He never gave the signal. Instead authorities raided Fenian paper the Irish People and arrested its leaders.

Informers attended the secret meetings that Devoy held with army recruits and tipped off police who arrested Devoy at the next meeting in March 1866. O’Reilly was not present but he was arrested at army barracks. His colonel shouted, “Damn you, O’Reilly! You have ruined the finest regiment in the service.” O’Reilly taken to Mountjoy prison and court martialed in June, charged with knowledge of a mutiny and not telling his commanding officer. Informers testified O’Reilly was part of a Fenian conspiracy. The defence cited O’Reilly’s good character but could not undermine the evidence. Aged 22, and was sentenced to death, commuted to 20 years penal servitude.

On September 4, O’Reilly was shackled with military prisoners and transported to London’s Millbank prison, now home of Tate Britain gallery. Millbank was a grim, silent place punctuated only by the clanging of doors and quarter hour chimes at nearby Westminster. Talking was forbidden even during the daily 15 minute exercise though prisoners secretly sent letters to each other. O’Reilly took comfort in Thomas A Kempis’s Imitation of Christ.

In April 1867 he was transferred to Chatham prison before being moved to Portsmouth and then Dartmoor in Devon. O’Reilly described the dreary moorside prison in his later novel Moondyne, “its two centuries of unloved existence in the midst of a wild land and fitful climate, had seared every wall-tower and gateway with lines and patches of discolouration.” By year’s end O’Reilly was on the move again – this time to the other side of the world, transported to Western Australia aboard the Hougoumont.

Though he did not know it, O’Reilly was on the last ever convict ship from Britain to Australia. New South Wales abolished transportation in 1840 and it lasted another 12 years in Van Diemen’s Land. Western Australia began taking prisoners in 1850 but faced pressure from anti-transportationists to end it. There were 280 convicts aboard the Hougoumont, all male, and 62 were Fenians. This caused alarm in WA especially after the “Manchester Outrages” where a policeman was accidentally killed after an attack on a police van, and three Fenians were executed. There were protests in Fremantle and settlers confronted the governor who told them their fears were exaggerated.

The ship left Portland in October 1867. O’Reilly was delighted to be reunited with fellow Fenians. Some would become lifelong friends including Denis Cashman who left a wife and three children in county Waterford. Their guards were surprisingly well disposed towards the Irish and relaxed rules on fraternisation aboard. The prisoners amused themselves with concerts, O’Reilly contributing poetry. Cashman said O’Reilly formed a conspiracy to capture the ship but was talked out of it by prisoners with lesser sentences.

He put his creativity towards a new project, a weekly newspaper. A priest helped secure paper, pens and ink. The first edition of the Wild Goose came out on November 9. That evening the concert was cancelled so O’Reilly could read aloud the handwritten eight-page paper to comrades. Cashman contributed artwork to the subtitle in Gothic letters “A Collection of Ocean Waifs.” The tone was literary rather than political and it hoped to “prove of interest to all to watch the changing flight of the flock.” Amid articles and poetry, a humorous “markets column” announced that biscuits were “getting livelier” while tea was “rather flat.” Co-editors O’Reilly and John Flood encouraged prisoners to stay true to Ireland “with the true unswerving love known only to exiles.”

Convicts loved it and the second edition was eagerly awaited a week later. O’Reilly wrote of an amusing mock trial of a prisoner tried by fellow convicts for stealing tobacco, “instigated by the devil and a love of plunder.” The offender was tarred and locked up in the toilet for three hours before being scrubbed with a hair broom. Flood encouraged Fenians to “fight life battle’s bravely out.” The last page stated that Fremantle was preparing a grand reception for the Wild Goose “by her feathered friend, the Swan.”

O’Reilly and Flood produced their paper every Saturday. Sometimes heavy seas made the going difficult as the Hougoumont sailed into the roaring forties, but the Wild Goose was always published on time, the sixth edition coming as they sailed within 3000 miles of Antarctica. The ship’s surgeon said the seventh edition would be the last as paper was confiscated in preparation for Fremantle. The last 16-page edition on December 21 was a “Christmas number” complete with ornate festive script. O’Reilly contributed a story called “Christmas Night.” He delayed the weekly reading of the paper until Christmas Day with a special dinner of “salt horse and plum duff” and a double ration of wine.

The captain demanded O’Reilly and Flood write a second copy for him, which they managed in heavy seas. Two mates also wanted their own copies keeping them busy until within sight of the Western Australian coast. On January 9, 1868 they docked at Fremantle, then a larger town than the capital upriver at Perth. The town was divided between those welcoming the convicts and those fearing the Fenians’ reputation. The convicts were taken by barge to prison and issued summer clothes. Civilians were assigned to work groups but 17 military Fenians including O’Reilly were kept in jail. O’Reilly was appointed orderly to the prison chaplain and after a month was sent 115 miles south to join a bush camp building a road at Bunbury.

In 1868 Bunbury was a busy export centre for timber and sandalwood. The new road would link Bunbury to Geographe Bay. The work camps were housed in tents and rude huts with hammocks for beds. They worked nine hour days under a baking sun with primitive tools, a wearying task, as O’Reilly wrote, with “no wages, no promotion, no incitement, no variation for good or bad, except stripes for the laggard.”

O’Reilly was marked out as a promising convict and was promoted to clerical assistant giving him respite from back-breaking work. He became a messenger to Bunbury and was attracted to his warden’s daughter Jessie. They had a brief but doomed affair. A note in his file said O’Reilly tried to commit suicide. He also attracted the dislike of an overseer, who punished him for a minor infraction, and he was not allowed letters for six months. One of the delayed letters was news of his mother’s death.

The harsh treatment awakened a desire to escape and he turned to Catholic priest Patrick McCabe for advice. McCabe thought escape was impossible but agreed to help. On an errand to Bunbury, O’Reilly met Irishman James Maguire who said McCabe would help Fenians escape aboard an American whaler. Over 40 convicts had escaped on whalers between 1850 and 1862 and British authorities thoroughly searched ships at port. When whaler Vigilant arrived in Bunbury in February 1869, McCabe paid the captain £30 and planned to smuggle O’Reilly aboard. One evening as O’Reilly was night constable on duty, he began his escape. Maguire and a friend escorted him to the mouth of the Collie River where they found a boat and rowed four miles silently past the town and its harbour police and beyond Bunbury’s estuary entrance into the ocean. They landed 12 miles north at a deserted beach north of Leschenault Peninsula near Australind. There they would wait a day or two for the Vigilant.

His companions went to find a former convict who lived nearby while O’Reilly searched for food. After he skinned and ate a possum, Maguire returned with water and provisions. They made a bed of tree branches and fell asleep exhausted. The following day they spied the Vigilant out to sea and rowed out to meet it. But the ship veered away. The men shouted in vain and the ship sailed out of sight. Bitterly, they returned to the shore and left O’Reilly to hide in the dunes.

Unknown to O’Reilly two other prisoners had escaped Bunbury on the same night as him. Police were everywhere and it was only by some miracle O’Reilly’s boat was not spotted as it passed the town. The two other men were later caught and when Police realised that O’Reilly was also missing, they combed the hills around the town, while he hid 12 miles away. The Vigilant was searched but the captain was worried that he might be followed and could not risk picking up O’Reilly.

In desperation O’Reilly took to his boat again and spent two days on the ocean. Remarkably he found the Vigilant again, but once more the ship veered away. O’Reilly rowed back to the dunes. He remained there for two weeks while McCabe and Maguire raised more money, this time to escape on the American whaler Gazelle. An English prisoner named Bowman blackmailed his way into the escape plans. Maguire took Bowman to the dunes where O’Reilly kept a suspicious eye on him. The following morning they rowed three miles to meet the Gazelle. This time O’Reilly was allowed to come aboard. Bowman joined him, though was not as welcome.

There remained dangers ahead. Gazelle was five months from home and British tentacles were everywhere on the seven seas. The ship sailed north and continued whaling with the occasional “gam” (meeting) with other whalers. O’Reilly was part of one whale chase and when the harpoon struck, the whale lashed out at O’Reilly’s boat, smashing it to smithereens. Second mate Henry Hathaway found him unconscious and head down in the water. He dragged O’Reilly up and punched him repeatedly to get the salt water out of him. O’Reilly convinced Hathaway to give him a second chance and they successfully dragged a whale aboard.

The Gazelle headed to the Indian Ocean island of Rodrigues for supplies. Now part of Mauritius, Rodrigues was then a British colony. When they landed in July 1869, authorities boarded the ship with information an Australian convict was aboard. They identified Bowman and arrested him. O’Reilly was not taken but suspected Bowman would inform on him. Hathaway formed a plan, hiding O’Reilly in a locker and telling the crew that O’Reilly was suicidal. Hathaway shouted “man overboard” and when the crew found O’Reilly’s hat in the water, they were convinced he had drowned. The following morning Bowman returned with soldiers to identify O’Reilly only to be told he was dead. The crew’s distress was not faked. After the Gazelle left the island, sailors were astonished when O’Reilly emerged from the locker.

It was a narrow escape. When the Gazelle gammed with American cargo ship Sapphire in the Indian Ocean, O’Reilly swapped ship taking the identity papers of a deserted sailor. The Sapphire took her cargo of cotton to Liverpool where O’Reilly stepped ashore as seaman John Soule. Though tempted he did not return to nearby Preston and instead boarded the Bombay bound for America. O’Reilly looked longingly as they passed the coast of Ireland, the closest he would ever get to home. He docked at Philadelphia on November 23, 1869, “a political refugee” in his own words, finally beyond the reach of British authorities.

O’Reilly was welcomed as an Irish hero in a reception at New York’s Cooper Institute. He joined the Fenians but was disappointed to find a split between those who wanted to attack Canada and those who wanted action in Ireland. After a month he took the advice of friends and moved to Boston, where he lived the rest of his life. While relations between Irish and nativists in Boston had improved since the 1850s when Massachusetts had a Know Nothing governor, there were still tensions and O’Reilly wanted to ease them.

John Boyle O’Reilly later in life.

O’Reilly met Cavan-born immigrant Patrick Donahoe who in 1836 started the Pilot, which became Boston’s main Irish Catholic newspaper. Donahoe offered him a job and by April 1870 O’Reilly told his aunt in Preston he was establishing a reputation and lived “as a gentleman.” He covered that month’s Fenian convention in New York and supported John O’Neill’s plan for a third invasion of Canada. O’Reilly followed O’Neill’s army to the border and wrote about their poor morale and discipline. O’Reilly joined the revolution which was a disaster and he was arrested. Disillusioned, he wrote “Fenianism has lost its mystery” and its leaders were “criminally incompetent.” He resigned from the movement. From here on, O’Reilly’s loyalty was to America.

Within a year O’Reilly became editor of the Pilot. While diehard Fenians detested him, his strong views on Irish assimilation helped the paper increase circulation. O’Reilly’s reputation grew with forceful lectures. Within two years, he was a wealthy man. He married Irish American woman Mary Murphy in 1872. The Pilot office was rocked by three fires in the following 12 months that destroyed Donahoe’s fortune. O’Reilly survived the disasters and his literary career flourished. In 1873 he published a book of poetry Songs from the Southern Seas which he dedicated to newborn daughter Mollie. While the reception was mixed it gained an enthusiastic following.

After Donahoe went bankrupt, O’Reilly bought the paper in partnership with Boston Archbishop, John Williams. The Pilot went from strength to strength as did O’Reilly’s reputation as a prominent Boston Catholic. He was distracted by matters past when the Fenians resolved to free remaining Irish military prisoners in Western Australia. O’Reilly and Cashman (now the Pilot‘s business manager) met old Fenian friend John Devoy to discuss the plan. O’Reilly suggested they talk to Henry Hathaway about buying a whaler to pick up the fugitives. Hathaway arranged for Devoy to buy a ship called the Catalpa while O’Reilly involved Western Australian friend Father McCabe in the rescue. The Catalpa picked up six Fenians off Fremantle and survived a stand-off with a British naval vessel before returning in triumph to America in 1876.

In 1878 O’Reilly published Moondyne in weekly instalments in the Pilot. The novel was based partly on Western Australian bushranger Moondyne Joe and partly on his own life. Though melodramatic, it was well received. Its themes included penal reform, which O’Reilly promoted in the paper. He was a supporter of rights of minorities, including Native Americans, Jews and especially African Americans. He attacked New York police who threatened to resign if a black man was appointed to the force. He supported armed retaliation against southern lynching. “The negro is a new man,” he wrote, “and he can be a great man if he will avoid modelling himself on the whites.”

O’Reilly supported the Irish Land League in 1879 and met Parnell in Boston a year later. By then O’Reilly had published his third book of verse and was the father of four daughters. Though O’Reilly was an athletic man of immense energy his busy life began to affect his health. He complained of insomnia and overwork and he took time off on canoe trips, which he described in a book Ethics of Boxing and Manly Sport. There was disappointment in 1885 when the British government turned down his request to visit Canada as an undischarged felon. O’Reilly knew he could never return to Ireland. He continued a punishing schedule of writing commissions and public engagements until illness in September 1889 forced convalescence in the mountains. He recovered and travelled to California in 1890 on a speaking tour, which added to his exhaustion.

O’Reilly returned to their summer house at Hull near Nantucket where he commuted daily to Boston to edit the paper. On the night of August 9, 1880 wife Mary asked him to go to the doctor’s for medicine. At midnight he arrived back with a doctor, who diagnosed nervous tension. O’Reilly had a second excursion at 2am after he spilled medicine. He returned with more medicine, the doctor advising he should take some himself. Mary woke at 3am and found her husband slumped in a chair. She couldn’t rouse him and sent for the doctor. O’Reilly rallied briefly before he collapsed and died, aged 46. The Boston Herald called it “heart failure” though the doctor listed a cause of death as “an overdose”. Suicide is also a possibility, given his prior attempt and his chronic overwork and pressure.

Cardinal Gibbons called his death “a public calamity” and former president Grover Cleveland hailed him as a “strong and able man”. O’Reilly was buried at the highest point of Boston’s Holyhood Cemetery, now marked by a bas-relief engraved on a basalt rock. There is also a memorial on the Fenway intersection to the “poet, patriot, orator.” According to A.G. Evans, O’Reilly helped change American perceptions of Irish-Americans, raised the consciousness of the Irish themselves, and was a Western Australian folk hero. In the last few weeks, Bunbury hosted a play on his romance with Jessie, Springfield Massachusetts’ John Boyle O’Reilly Club built a new pavilion, while Drogheda held a wreath laying in his honour. O’Reilly’s impact remains profound on three continents.

Why I’ll be voting Yes in the Voice Referendum

On October 14, Australians will vote in a referendum to change the federal constitution. The change, if passed, would recognise Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders (ATSI) as the first people of Australia and would also create a new body subject to parliamentary laws called the ATSI Voice to make representations to parliament on matters related to ATSI. According to the government’s Referendum booklet, the “yes” case recognises and listens to Indigenous advice to improve their lives while the “no” case says the change is too big, too risky and divisive. If you are not sure, no-campaigners say, then you should vote no. However if that is true, then so is the corollary: If you are sure, then vote yes, which is what I’ll be doing.

I grew up in Ireland and moved to Australia in November 1988. I had no idea then it would be a permanent move but I quickly loved Australia as a vivacious country, brash and confident in its future. In time, I married an Australian woman and had two Australian daughters. Prime minister Paul Keating made it easy for me to become an Australian citizen when he removed the Queen from the oath of allegiance to Australia and I happily swore fealty to my new country in 1994.

I just had one nagging doubt. I knew little or nothing about Australia’s Indigenous people and despite the significance of the bicentennial year, Australia’s past seemed a touchy subject. If Australians remembered the past at all it was reverence for military adventures on foreign fields or for hardy country pioneers who fought only against the land. Indigenous people didn’t fit neatly into the accepted histories though they were being dealt with by a process called “reconciliation”. What was being reconciled? And with whom? It was never made clear. What actually happened in 1788? What happened in the years before? The years after? How did the land change hands from black to white? These were questions that bothered me.

The answers first took me into deep time. A study of Indigenous Australian DNA has shown they are the most ancient continuous civilisation in the world, pre-dating Australia itself, which was then part of the supercontinent of Sahul connecting New Guinea to Tasmania. Genetic data showed humans travelled along the south Asian coastline before reaching Sahul across low sea levels and quickly fanned out across the continent. Stone tools at Malakunanja and Nauwalabila rock shelters in Kakadu National Park are 50,000 years old. Astonishingly, the oldest human remains outside Africa are from western New South Wales at Lake Mungo (Willandra Lakes). Humans arrived there between 50-46 thousand years ago (kya) while the skeleton dated to 45-42 kya. Were Malakunanja and Lake Mungo part of any other country’s history, they would be celebrated and Lake Mungo would be a site of pilgrimage. But here in Australia, they remain unknown.

Writers like Bill Gammage and Bruce Pascoe pointed out the millennia of achievements of the people that followed, such as fire management, trade routes, townships, and dams. Indigenous societies were intimately and inextricably linked to the land. Stories and knowledge about the land were highly valued and storytellers and songsters were highly-valued members of the community. But there was no writing and their dreaming tracks and songlines were indecipherable to white eyes and ears. It suited too many people to claim Indigenous people were “nomads” with no concept of land ownership. A subtle racism still exists in Australia predicated on the notion there was no civilisation or agriculture on the continent before Europeans arrived and the land was “there for the taking.”

So Australian history begins not with Lake Mungo, but with the First Fleet in 1788 and Australia Day marks the day the British flag was first hoisted at Sydney Cove. The British penal colonists did not engage in treaty talks and never sought to negotiate with the land owners. Instead, they claimed the land belonged to no one and took it for themselves. French navigator Louis de Freycinet was an early visitor to Sydney and recognised the problem at the heart of the young colony. “The very fact that Europeans landed and established themselves at Port Jackson, was as far as the Aborigines were concerned, and according to the laws under which they lived, a hostile action.” Arthur Phillip tried to keep the peace but those that followed him saw the natives as “savages” and began a land grab that fanned out from Sydney, eventually spreading across the continent.

The Black War convulsed Tasmania in the 1820s while across the mainland Native Police forces under white commanders pacified unruly tribes at the barrel of a gun. Queensland’s Native Police survived 60 years as the frontier rolled north and west, with massacres disguised as “collisions” and “dispersals”. They continued into the 20th century with the six week killing spree at Coniston in the Tanami Desert in 1928 killing at least 100 people, a crime for which no-one was ever charged.

White Australia never acknowledged Indigenous resistance nor the heroes of that resistance. America is far from perfect dealing with its settler history but at least Cochise, Crazy Horse, Geronimo and Sitting Bull have made it into popular consciousness. Australian equivalents who fought to save their way of life, such as Pemulwuy, Yagan, Jandamarra, Windradyne, and Bussamarai, remain steadfastly unknown. Survivors of the massacres had their rights restricted in New South Wales and Queensland or were herded into gulags like Palm Island and Cherbourg, which survive today as desperately poor townships out of sight and out of mind.

There remains a tendency in Australia to deny any of this ever happened. In 1963 Anthropologist Bill Stanner called it “the Great Australian Silence”. This silence wasn’t absent-mindedness, Stanner said, but rather “a structural matter, a view from a window which has been carefully placed to exclude a whole quadrant of the landscape.” Stanner was speaking in 1963, just after ATSI people got the vote. That decision began to bring Indigenous people into the Australian story, a process accelerated by the 1967 referendum that they were counted in the census and that the Commonwealth would have a role to play in what was previously a state issue. In the 1980s and 90s, there was progress on land rights, historians began to investigate the past, an Aboriginal representative body (Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission) was established and the 1992 Mabo decision ended the fiction of “terra nullius” and enforced native title.

But a backlash began around 1996 led by the election of far right extremist Pauline Hanson. Hanson found many sympathetic listeners when she promoted the “usurper’s complex” that the government was being too generous to Indigenous people. Within a few years, Liberal Prime Minister John Howard had made Hanson’s views mainstream. ATSIC was abolished, research into the past was derided as “black armband” history, and there was a move to limit native title.

Yet Indigenous people remained at the bottom of Australia’s ladder as every “Closing the Gap” indicator showed. The gap was a stark reminder of a great divide in Australia across education, income, housing, mental health, chronic disease, child and maternal health, access to health services, incarceration, and more. According to the Close the Gap campaign steering committee, the gap led to an immense and unnecessary burden of suffering and grief for ATSI people. For the rest of us, it was a “scar on an unhealed past” and a “stain on the reputation of the nation”.

The Voice is an attempt to heal that past. My only criticism of the yes case is that the change does not go far enough. What is really needed is a Treaty, to formally acknowledge and provide recompense for the 150-year long war that saw the entire continent of Australia change hands. A Treaty to settle “fundamental grievances, and establish binding frameworks of future engagement and dispute resolution” was the centrepiece of the 2017 Uluru Statement from the Heart, which acknowledged ATSI tribes as the first sovereign nations of Australia co-existing with “the sovereignty of the Crown”. But white Australia has long resisted the truth of that sovereignty and the war to defeat it, and although Indigenous no-campaigner Lydia Thorpe has called for one, there appears little appetite for discussion of it during the campaign. Treaties, if they happen at all, will be driven by the states and territories, such as Queensland’s Path to Treaty, Treaty in Victoria, and the Northern Territory Treaty Commission.

Instead the referendum focuses on another aspect of the Uluru Statement. The Statement noted that in the 1967 Referendum, Indigenous people were counted but now they need to be heard. For Indigenous people to “take their rightful place” in this country, the statement asked for a “First Nations Voice” in the Constitution. South Australia has taken a similar approach with its First Nations Voice to Parliament.

Sadly, the National Party decided to oppose the federal voice from the outset. They said the Voice will not advance the primary aim of Closing the Gap, though they offered no alternative solutions other than a “focus on local and regional voice bodies and traditional owners” which is exactly what the Voice is designed to do. The Nationals’ opposition is no real surprise as they represent the biggest beneficiaries of the stolen land; the farmers who protested the shrillest against the Mabo and Wik decisions and whose leader in the 1990s infamously promised to pour “bucket-loads of extinguishment” on the native title rights of Indigenous peoples.

Nevertheless like the earlier referendum, the Voice should still have gained bipartisan support of the two major parties. After all, the 1967 referendum happened under a Liberal government and Robert Menzies founded the party in 1945 to represent the “forgotten people”. None have been more forgotten in Australia than its indigenous people. But the Liberals have moved steadily rightward in recent years and Peter Dutton is using the referendum to shore up his base. Dutton has claimed members of the Voice would be “a group of city-based academics” but confusingly has pledged to hold a second referendum on the matter in the unlikely event he wins government at the next election. While Dutton has been quick to back false claims that the likes of Marcia Langton and Ray Martin are rubbishing no-voters not the no-campaign, Dutton has left most of the running to NT Indigenous Senator Jacinta Price who calls the referendum divisive and says it seeks to create different levels of citizenship.

But fellow Indigenous woman and constitutional lawyer Dr Megan Davis disagrees. She says a First Nations Voice in the Constitution would shift Indigenous affairs “out of the realm of ideological party politics, where our issues are ruthlessly measured against utilitarian rule.” While Davis ultimately wants a Treaty, and a Truth and Reconciliation Commission similar to post-apartheid South Africa, she said the Voice must come first. “The bulk of our people require enormous amounts of support and resources to get to the threshold” of entering treaties. Davis says Australia has never grappled with that original grievance; the dispossession. “It needs to be resolved in order for us to flourish, for our health and wellbeing to get better and for us not to be so dislocated from the Australian people and Australian state,” she said.

Let’s vote yes and make it happen.