Eureka Rebellion's Impact on Australian Democracy

873 Words2 Pages

To what extent did the rebellion at Eureka influence the development of democracy in Australia?

The battle at eureka accelerated the development of Democracy in Australia. It was built upon democratic language and chartist and egalitarianism ideas which brought democratic reforms. Those a part of the battle continued to demand change. Yet there were boundaries to their power.

The build up to the battle of Eureka was phrased with democratic language. It was the miners role in society that was filled with democracy. In Doudiet's painting Swearing Allegiance to the Southern Cross the diggers are forming as a group and saying “We swear by the Southern Cross to stand truly by each other and to fight to defend our rights and liberties”. In their …show more content…

The Royal Commission in the Goldfields introduced Democratic reforms. For instance, it abolished the hated Miners License which was 8 pounds a year and replaced it with a Miners right was now 1 pound. This gave the miners a chance to earn a living and it also gave the miners the vote. It also changed how the goldfields was run, with less authority figures so miners has more control over their own lives and their was less government pressure and tension. A secret ballot, a demand of the Ballarat Reform League, was introduced soon after the battle. This is a demonstration of the immediate development of laws to make the government more democratic in Victoria. And fourthly, a jury system acquitted 12 out of 13 leaders of the battle which is another example how power started to ascend from the people. Leaders of the battle who were acquitted continued to fight for …show more content…

Firstly, they only made these changes in Victoria. The democratic reforms made after the battle were only in Victoria and democracy was brought in by other colonies by different factors which could have equally contributed to democracy in Australia. Secondly, whilst the Legislative Assembly was open for change, the Legislative Council (also known as the Upper House) was more restricted on the members and voting, and had a more narrow representation. Thirdly, Victoria didn't have payment of members of parliament until much after the battle of Eureka, which shows how not all of the reforms of the Ballarat were achieved soon after the battle. And lastly, Electoral boundaries were designed to favour the pastoralists. This means that one sheep farmers vote was worth seven times more than a miners vote. It was not a proper democracy as it lacked egalitarianism ideals and there was differentiated representation that was not fair. Historians argue on the overall impact of the stockade. Geoffrey Blainey states that “the rebellion took place at a crucial time when Victoria was about to make a decisive step towards democracy. The rebellion did not initiate or make the first step but it hastened the second.” And Mark Peel claims that the demands of the Ballarat reform league was “distinctly colonial” and that it shared a global language of rights and justice. Yet John Hirst writes

Open Document