Foxy,

When the Leahy brothers were venturing into the highlands of New Guinea in the thirties, they let people think they were some sort of gods. But women watched them and secretly followed them into the bush and noticed pretty quick that they attended to nature's necessities like anybody else. And so, it was soon discovered that they weren't gods.

Sic transit gloria.

Joe

I would of thought every girl not given to an uncle, every person with electricity, a roof over their head and running water would be thankful today. No instead identity politics where history is revised to fit a very erroneous narrative.

Dear loudmouth2,

Oh come on mate. This was from a correspondent of one of your state's rags in 1885.

“In familiar parlance Germany has "made a splash" as a colonial power *in posse*, which is about all that Prince von Bismarck hoped to effect by taking the initiative in a sort of international contract intended to regulate the future methods by which civilized nations should annex countries "belonging to nobody," except to their inhabitants—*terra nullius* is the agreeable term by which they are described in the Conference protocols.”

Hi SR,

Sorry, I was referring to the use of the term 'terra nullius' specifically in relation to Australia. I apologise for the confusion.

Yes, Bismarck and the other imperialists at the 1884-1885 Berlin Conference used the pretext that countries were without government, to invade territory all over the world - New Guinea, Samoa, East Africa, modern-day Namibia, bits of China, etc.

But what is interesting even about that is that the British - I hate to write this, it doesn't put them in a completely bad light - at the same time as they were invading on the pretext that countries didn't have effective governments, did, in many cases, especially West Africa, recognise the forms and extent of land ownership that already existed. [See C. K. Meek, on the Land Matters page of my web-site: www.firstsources.info].

Certainly, in southern, central and eastern Africa, they over-rode existing systems of land ownership in many areas, and imposed various land-oriented taxes, poll taxes, etc. In Kenya of course, that eventually led to the people's struggle for independence, i.e. the Mau Mau Uprising.

I'm no land lawyer but there seems to be confusion between

* 'terra nullius', land which people use but no-one owns or over which there doesn't seem to be any form of recognised land ownership, no means of buying and selling of land; and

* 'res nullius', which can mean different things - country over which there is no government or political authority; and

* 'lex nullius', country in which there does not seem to be any system of recognised law, in particular law in relation to land and land ownership.

Out of that, one question does emerge: did/do Aboriginal groups have forms of land ownership which could be recognised as such by anybody else ? Or did they have elaborate and ancient systems of land use which did not necessitate actual ownership ? i.e. they were hunters and gatherers (who need too roam and forage over large areas of land) rather than farmers (who need specific areas of land and mutually agreed systems of land-holding).

Cheers,

Joe

What Great Lie indeed. The only lie is the ongoing misrepresentation of our colonial past by the hateful, hate-filled branch of the Left - not all of the Left.

Hi Joe (Loudmouth),

Regarding Captain Cook and his crew - more apt to
say -

"Semper Nauta". (Always a sailor).

As for the Leahy Brothers and PNG?

The remarkable Leahy family - interesting story.

Dan Leahy stayed in the area to raise a family and
run a successful plantation. He married into tribal
society and had 10 children several of whom hold
important positions in PNG life.

History is fascinating.