Lloyd Robson has produced a finely researched and lucid book which will become a standard reference on the early political history of the island of Tasmania. Volume One deals with the intrigues, conflicts and self-indulgences that were endemic in the emerging society and boldly illustrates the path to ‘self rather than ‘responsible’ government, together with the feelings of animosity that were generated towards particular colonial governorships.

The depth of animosity depended upon the ability of a governor to balance the factional interests of the colonists with those of the British Colonial Secretary’s Department. As a consequence, Governor Arthur was favourably received as he was adept at achieving a modicum of harmony between the two conflicting forces. especially in the area of administration of the convict assignment system. Governors Eardly-Wilmot and Franklin were not treated with the same alacrity by either faction. Franklin, in particular, found it  difficult to placate both colonist and Whitehall and as a result ‘was hated with an intensity of which only the neurotic and grasping settlers of Van Diemen’s Land were capable’.

In between the discussion on the political conflict over land grants and the debates over the control of education by Church or State there is a skilful depiction of the evolving colonial society under the headings of ‘A Modicum of Culture’ and ‘Convict and Free’. These chapters form a welcome retreat from the more obtrusively political discussions which at times are overwhelming in their wealth of historical detail and where the discussion appears to have lost direction in a maze of regulations and names of people complete with their antecedents.

It is in the fine detail that numerous, although slight historical inaccuracies occur, as in the case of Mr Frodsham, whose origins are claimed to be unknown, when in fact he was the son of W.J. Frodsham, Esq. F. R.S. There is also a certain amount of repetitiveness necessitated by the nature of this political narrative, especially when the argument is centred on problems that confronted successive Governors. One such problem was the arrears in quit rents for crown lands. Eardly-Wilmot had attempted to resolve this question but was thwarted by the legality of collecting these rents and although it was probably necessary to reaffirm this point under discussion on Denison, perhaps it was an over-sight to repeat the Eardly-Wilmot comment on this topic almost verbatim.

The analysis of the economic problems confronted by the governors is not only commendable but raises issues not previously researched by historians. especially in the area of colonial finance and its administration.

Robson pursues several themes in his narrative. The first is that the establishment of Van Diemen’s Land was an invasion of a land already owned by a black population. By implication invasion also meant the establishment of beach heads and the eventual occupation of all the land by white usurpers. While it is acknowledged that there were some people including Governor Collins who ‘piously hoped that the extension of grazing grounds and progressive occupation of the country might prove to be injurious to neither the European interloper nor Aboriginal inhabitant’ there was in reality no hope of an amicable solution. Instead white greed for land and the resulting conflict over title meant the eventual annihilation by the ‘blood-thirsty settlers of Van Diemen’s Land’ of the indigenous Aboriginal population.

The tendency to see this controversial issue purely in terms of black and white conflict and not also in the context of the political and social issues surrounding the development and establishment of a nineteenth century colonial society is slightly disturbing. Robson implies that the settlement of Van Diemen’s Land created a society in which people had few moral or social scruples and were concerned only with looking after their own interests. 7 his was probably true for a proportion of the population, or indeed even a large percentage, but it takes no account of the common people. This is not surprising however, considering that the book is essentially concerned with discussion of the administration of a British colony.

Two questions arise in relation to these themes. Is it a correct assumption that the colonial society was formed by people incapable of governing themselves in a responsible manner and if so what are the political and social implications beyond 1855? Is the conclusion that all Tasmanians were people who ‘had no serious ideological convictions which separated the mass of colonists one from the other. All were essentially immigrants on the make’ a valid one?

The issues of ultimate responsibility for the genocide of the Aboriginal population and the acquisition of the land by white invaders, together with the emergence of what could almost be described as a flawed colonial society, is both topical and controversial. Lloyd Robson having raised these themes allows limitless potential for his second volume on the history of Tasmania. A book which will no doubt demonstrate the same command of research and the flowing literary style which make his first volume a work of immense interest to all those concerned with the origins of the island state.