Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

The republicans fail to 'steal' Eureka

By Diana Melleuish - posted Friday, 3 December 2004


I am left to reflect on the relevance of Eureka to our constitutional debate. What was the legacy of Eureka? Why had the republicans and the Labor Party tried to appropriate it? Was their attempt valid?

After attending the Eureka conference - after listening to Geoffrey Blainey, Desmond O’Grady, and even to Gough Whitlam and Greg Barns - I am even more convinced that we have the best form of government Australia could have and that the legacy of Eureka is the democratic, peaceful and stable society we have become. It was tragic that 35 people lost their lives that day - but as Geoffrey Blainey has demonstrated there was no need.

The men who endorsed the principles and objects of “Ballarat Reform League” on Bakery Hill on November 11, 1854, which stated:

Advertisement

That it is not the wish of the League to effect an immediate separation of this colony from the parent country….but that if Queen Victoria continues to act upon the ill advice of dishonest ministers and insists upon indirectly dictating obnoxious laws for the colony, under the assumed authority of the Royal prerogative, the Reform League will endeavour to supersede such Royal prerogative by asserting that of the people, which is the most royal of all prerogatives, as the people are the only legitimate source of all political power.

They simply did not understand - as with others who had flirted with republican principles in the 1850s - that democracy and self-government were perfectly compatible with remaining under the Crown. We understand that now, as did our Founding Fathers in 1901. The commitment that the diggers of Eureka had to democracy in 1854 remains with us today - but we know that we can have our democracy within the framework of a system of constitutional monarchy which provides the checks and balances to protect those “rights and liberties” so eagerly defended under the Southern Cross on that Eureka day in December 1854.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. All

This is an edited version which was first published on the Australians for Constitutional Monarchy web site, December 2004.



Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

1 post so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Diana Melleuish is Australia for Constitutional Monarchy’s Publications and Research Officer.

Related Links
Australians for Constitutional Monarchy
Article Tools
Comment 1 comment
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Latest from Australians for Constitutional Monarchy
 The formidable Fred Nile prevails: premier concedes
 Prorogue then intimidate
 The ‘Utegate’ affair and the constitution
 ETS: emissions trading scheme or energy tax swindle?
 Information and media manipulation par excellence
 More...
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy