Hi Steele,

I apologise, yes, there was certainly that massacre at Guichen Bay in the SA south-east in 1848. Brown's ride along the Coorong to Adelaide, in order to establish an alibi, was well-known. My memory of typing up the details in Dr Moorhouse's Letters is sometimes patchy, which I'm cursing myself for. His account is on my web-site, www.firstsources.info, on the first page, 'Protector's Letters'. There were other reported cases of suspected poisonings around Port Lincoln, also described by Moorhouse, in which the alleged murderer escaped by ship to California. There was also a rumoured massacre on the upper Murray, maybe in the 1880s.

Forgive an old man for his lousy memory, Steele.

So yes, South Australia wasn't exceptional. Moorhouse thoroughly examined the massacre scene at Guichen Bay, grave by grave. If he could do that back then, with their rudimentary forensic abilities, then surely similar investigations could be carried out on the two thousand or more massacres in Queensland ? If I was an archaeology or forensic science student in Queensland, I would be very interested to carry out post-grad research on the most likely sites there.

Or do we let the Ivan Milats of the nineteenth century go undetected and unaccountable ?

Cheers,

Joe

Dear Steele,

With some people you're never going to gain common
ground and arguing with them is a waste of time.
You'll only end up further apart. Therefore no matter
what the evidence that's presented to them - they'll
always find another road to divert the discussion.
Some people can't know what they haven't been taught
and they can't feel what they haven't been hurt by.

Today, things are changing as the four year extensive
research project at the University of Newcastle shows -
there's research being
done that details the sources of evidence and this is
a useful tool for history students, scholars and the
general public. Hopefully, we shall get out of this
"us" and "them" cycle - and acknowledge the evidence
being presented.

Dear Steele,

This may be of interest:

http://newmatilda.com/2018/01/19/january-26-to-mark-launch-of-national-broadcast-of-the-original-100-always-was-always-will-be/

Dear Steele,

Did you know that Mark Latham has a petition running
to - "Save Australia Day?"

I just noticed that if you took away the letters and
left only the initials - S A D.
It reads - SAD.

I wonder if Mr Latham realised that?

I note the date proposed by the Greens is: "May 9 – the same day in 1901 when we became a self-governing federation; again in 1927, when the Parliament shifted to Canberra (from Melbourne); and finally, in the bicentennial year of 1988, when the current Parliament House was opened." However in 1901 aboriginals did not have the vote or were considered legal citizens of Australia. "It was on 27th May in 1967, that indigenous people were formally recognised as Australian citizens. ON 27 MAY 1967, 90.77 per cent of Australians voted 'yes' in a constitutional referendum to improve indigenous rights and award citizenship to Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders."

His mother was part of the stolen generation, but he wants 26th January to remain Australia Day. https://www.northernstar.com.au/news/celebrate-the-country-we-are-today-shearer/3316394/