Heritage Council of Victoria



?????Monster Meeting Site Golden Point Road, Golden Point, Victoria?Heritage Council Registrations CommitteeHearing – Wednesday 17 May, 2017?Decision of the Heritage Council After considering the Executive Director’s recommendation and submissions received, and after conducting a hearing, pursuant to s 42(1)(a) of the Heritage Act 1995, the Heritage Council has determined that the Monster Meeting Site, Golden Point Road, Golden Point is of cultural heritage significance to the State of Victoria and warrants inclusion in the Victorian Heritage Register.??Heritage Council Registrations Committee:?Lucinda Peterson (Chair)Megan GouldingNatica Schmeder????Decision Date – 6 July 2017??APPEARANCES/SUBMISSIONS?Written submissions pursuant to s38(1)(a) of the Heritage Act 1995 were received from the following persons, who also made written submissions pursuant to s41(5) and appeared at the hearing to make verbal submissions:Mr John EllisMr Glenn Braybrook?Written submissions pursuant to s38(1)(a) of the Heritage Act 1995 were received from the following persons, who did not make further written submissions or appear at the hearing to make verbal submissions:Mount Alexander ShireMr Gerard Oldman?Written submissions pursuant to s41(5) of the Heritage Act 1995 were received from the following persons, who also appeared at the hearing and made verbal submissions:Mr David PetrusmaThe Executive Director, Heritage Victoria (‘the Executive Director’)Submissions were received from the Executive Director, Heritage Victoria. Ms Nicola Stairmand (Heritage Assessments Officer), Mr David Bannear (Archaeologist) and Dr Marina Larsson (Principal, Heritage Assessments) appeared, made verbal submissions and were available to take questions on behalf of the Executive Director. ??IntroductionThe PlaceOn 20 January 2017, the Executive Director made a recommendation (‘the Recommendation’) that land at Golden Point Road, Golden Point, be included in the Victorian Heritage Register (‘the Register’).The proposed extent of registration set out in the Recommendation is described as the Monster Meeting Site and is located near the township of Chewton, but in fact is within the locality of Golden Point, near the confluence of Forest and Wattle Creeks. The site consists principally of grassed land across a shallow rise, which falls away towards Forest and Wattle Creeks. A large corrugated iron shed, cattle yard, fencing and a Monster Meeting commemorative monument are located within the recommended extent of registration (‘the Place’).The following ‘History Summary’ of the Place is taken from page 5 of the Recommendation:‘History SummaryIn the first week of July 1851, Victoria separated from New South Wales and became a colony in its own right. In the same week, gold was discovered in the new colony. Attempting to slow the rush of workers to the gold fields, and generate revenue, Governor La Trobe introduced a licence fee of 30 shillings per month for the right to mine for gold, effective from 1 September 1851. Even when enforced, the licence system did little to slow the rush, and by the end of November 1851, diggers were leaving their jobs in cities, towns and on pastoral stations and travelling to the gold fields in their thousands. On 1 December 1851 Governor La Trobe issued a proclamation which proposed to double the licence fee to ?3, effective from 1 January 1852. Shortly after, notices appeared along the Forest Creek diggings urging diggers to meet and object to the proposed increase. The Monster Meeting of more than 10,000 diggers, took place on 15 December 1851, at the Shepherd’s Hut, Forest Creek. Two days later the government announced that the licence fee increase had been revoked. The gold licencing system continued to be a point of contention and continued objections led to the Red Ribbon Rebellion in Bendigo in 1853 and ultimately to the Eureka Stockade in Ballarat in 1854.’The following ‘Description Summary’ is taken from the Recommendation at page 5:‘Description SummaryThe Monster Meeting Site is located on the northern outskirts of the township of Chewton, near the confluence of Forest and Wattle Creeks. It is surrounded by the Castlemaine Diggings National Heritage Park (VHR H2407), but is not part of the Park. The site itself consists of grassed land across a shallow rise, which falls away towards Forest and Wattle Creeks. A large corrugated iron shed, a cattle yard and fencing are located on the site and a Monster Meeting commemorative monument is located to the south of the shed, on the recommended land. This site is part of the traditional land of the Dja Dja Wurrung.’The Committee notes that the above ‘Description Summary’ and ‘History Summary’ are part of a proposed Statement of Cultural Heritage Significance in the Recommendation. They are provided for information purposes only. The above material does not form part of any endorsed documentation relating to the Place. NominationA nomination for the Place to be included in the Register made by Mr Ellis was accepted by the Executive Director on 12 January 2017.Recommendation of the Executive DirectorAs described above, on 20 January 2017 the Executive Director recommended that the Place be included in the Register. During the 60-day advertisement period, four (4) submissions pursuant to s38(1)(a) of the Heritage Act 1995 (‘the Act’) were received in response to the Recommendation, three of which supported the inclusion of the Place in the Register and one of which objected to the proposed extent of registration of the Place. In accordance with s41(5) of the Act, a Heritage Council Registrations Committee (‘the Committee’) was constituted to consider the Recommendation and all submissions received in response to it. In accordance with s41(5) of the Act, parties were notified that the Heritage Council would be conducting a hearing in relation to whether or not the Place should be included in the Register. ?The Committee then invited further written submissions and a hearing was scheduled for 17 May 2017 (‘the hearing’). A late submission was made and accepted by the Committee.?No parties objected to this ruling.Site InspectionOn 16 May 2017, the Committee and the Heritage Council Hearings Coordinator made an unaccompanied site inspection of the Place. No submissions were sought, made or received at the time of the site inspection. Preliminary and Other Matters Future Use of the PlaceSome submissions received referred to the future use of the Place. The Committee appreciates that there is at times interest in and concern about the potential development of places. However, the role of this Committee is to determine the cultural heritage significance of the Place in its current state. It is not the Committee’s task to consider the future development or use of the Place or to consider planning scheme considerations that may be heard in another forum. Any submissions dealing with these matters have not been considered by the Committee in reaching its decision. Conflicts of InterestThe Chair invited Committee members to declare any interests that they may have in relation to the Place or to the parties to the hearing. Committee members stated that there were no conflicts of interest to declare. ISSUESThis section is not intended to be a complete record of submissions that were made to the Committee. It is a summary of what the Committee considers to be the key issues, followed by an explanation of the Committee’s decision in relation to each key issue.Any reference to Criteria or an individual Criterion refers to the ‘Heritage Council Criteria for Assessment of Places of Cultural Heritage Significance’ (as adopted by the Heritage Council on 7 August 2008) [see Attachment 1].Any reference to the Guidelines refers to the ‘The Victorian Heritage Register Criteria and Threshold Guidelines’ (as adopted by the Heritage Council on 6 December 2012). Summary of issuesAll parties to the hearing were broadly supportive of the Recommendation to include the Monster Meeting Site in the Register but in their submissions parties expressed differing views in relation to the proposed extent of registration of the Place and in relation to some of the information included in the Recommendation.The Executive Director recommended that the Place be included in the Register on the basis that it satisfies Criterion A at a State level as a Place of significance to the history of Victoria. The Executive Director submitted that the Place is a comparatively intact landscape that has a clear association with the discovery and mining of gold in Victoria, and with the beginnings of democracy in Victoria. In response to the submissions of Mr Braybrook and Mr Petrusma, which disagreed with the proposed extent of registration, the Executive Director submitted that on the basis of all the evidence considered by his office he is confident that the Place includes the location of the Monster Meeting, including the location of the Shepherd’s Hut and the dray on which speakers at the Monster Meeting stood, and includes sufficient land for more than 10,000 diggers to gather.Mount Alexander Shire and Mr Ellis were broadly supportive of the Recommendation. Mr Ellis proposed further changes to the information proposed to be included in the registration of the Place.Mr Braybrook objected to the Recommendation and submitted that the recommended extent of registration does not correctly identify or include the site of the Monster Meeting. Mr Petrusma also submitted that the recommended extent of registration does not correctly identify or include the entire site of the Monster Meeting.Mr Oldman objected to the Recommendation on the basis that the proposed registration of the Place was a ‘waste of community assets’ and that the registration of the Place would cause community disharmony in the local area.Criterion A – Importance to the course, or pattern of Victoria’s cultural historyThe parties broadly agreed that the Place is of significance to Victoria’s cultural history in the terms of Criterion A. Submissions and evidenceThe Executive Director submitted that the Place be included in the Register on the basis that it satisfies Criterion A at a State level as a substantially intact site that has a clear association with the discovery and mining of gold in Victoria, a clear association with the Monster Meeting and with the history of democracy in Victoria, associations which are evident in the physical fabric of the Place and by reference to documentary sources. The Executive Director submitted that the Place allows its clear associations with the State’s cultural heritage to be understood and interpreted better than the sites of other comparable protest meetings across the State. ?The other parties to the hearing broadly agreed with the Executive Director that the Monster Meeting was of historical significance to the State of Victoria. Mr Braybrook and Mr Petrusma objected to the Recommendation only on the basis of location and information relating to the Monster Meeting. Mr Ellis suggested some corrections to the proposed registration information relating to the site. Mr Oldman objected to the registration of the Place for reasons that did not relate to its argued historical significance. ??Discussion and conclusion ?With respect to Criterion A, the Committee agrees with the Recommendation and with the Executive Director’s submission in particular that the Place is of importance to the course of Victoria’s cultural history as the site of the December 1851 Monster Meeting. The Committee is of the view that the relative intactness of the landscape of the Place does allow the association of the Place with the discovery and mining of gold in Victoria, with the Monster Meeting specifically and, by extension, with the beginnings of democracy in Victoria, to be understood better than most other places in Victoria with the same association. The Committee is of the view that the Monster Meeting Site is historically significant to the State of Victoria as the location of the first organised protest meeting objecting to the gold licensing system in colonial Victoria and the Committee determines that the association of the Place with the Monster Meeting is evidenced by the rich documentary sources considered as part of the hearing. ?The Committee notes it did not receive submissions from parties submitting that the Monster Meeting and related events were not of historical significance to the State of Victoria.Having considered all of the submissions and evidence provided to it, the Committee finds that Criterion A is satisfied at a State level in relation to the Place, and determines therefore that the Place warrants inclusion in the Register.Criterion C – Potential to yield information that will contribute to an understanding of Victoria’s cultural historyThe parties did not make detailed submissions in relation to Criterion C.Discussion and conclusion ?With respect to Criterion C, the Committee notes that some parties did refer generally to the archaeology of elements of the Place and in particular, the location of the Shepherd’s Hut.The Committee notes that any archaeological material related to the Shepherd’s Hut may be of interest but would not be related to the history of the Monster Meeting or the registration of the Place apart from its existence contemporaneous with the Monster Meeting and its function at that time as a landmark for the meeting site. In this context, the Committee does not consider that Criterion C applies to this site.The Committee notes that the registration of the Place in relation to Criterion A means that any subsurface works at the Place require a permit in accordance with the Act.Extent of RegistrationSubmissions and evidenceThe Executive Director recommended that the extent of registration should comprise the whole of the Place and submitted that the basis for the proposed extent of registration is that it includes the probable location of the Shepherd’s Hut, the location of the dray where the speakers stood and sufficient land on which an estimated 10,000 to 15,000 men would have assembled for the Monster Meeting. In the Recommendation and in written submissions, the Executive Director relied on the comparative study of documentary sources, including a variety of maps and sketches, to support the proposed extent of registration. In submissions the Executive Director also noted his view that the drawings referred to, in particular the 1851 David Tulloch sketch, are not necessarily historically accurate and further noted that, in considering an appropriate extent of registration, allowances had been made for ‘artistic license’. The Executive Director submitted however, that he is of the view that the David Tulloch sketch shows that the dray upon which the speakers stood was located in reasonable proximity to the Shepherd’s Hut, although illustrations could not be relied upon as an exact location to the metre. At the hearing, Mr Bannear tabled a georeferenced version of the 1853 map which the Executive Director relied on for the Recommendation. The map tabled by Mr Bannear shows the probable location of the Shepherd’s Hut on the 1853 map to be approximately 70 metres east of the confluence of Wattle and Forest Creeks which places the Shepherd’s Hut within the extent of the proposed extent of the registration of the Place. Based on the conclusions drawn above concerning the likely proximity of the Shepherd’s Hut to the dray where the speakers stood, the georeferenced map supports the Executive Director’s conclusion that the location of the speaker’s dray is included in the proposed extent of the registration of the Place. ?The Executive Director submitted that he is confident that the Place includes the location of the Monster Meeting, including the location of the Shepherd’s Hut, the dray on which speakers at the Monster Meeting stood, and sufficient land for more than 10,000 diggers to gather.Mr Ellis supported the registration of the Place based on the recommended extent of registration and submitted that he did not believe the Tulloch sketch should be taken literally to determine the precise extent of land relating to the Monster Meeting encompassing 10,000 to 15,000 attendees. ???At the hearing Mr Braybrook submitted that additional land to the east of the proposed extent should be included in the Register and submitted that the proposed extent of registration does not adequately include the location of Monster Meeting site or more specifically, in Mr Braybrook’s view, the drays on which the speakers stood. Mr Braybrook submitted his interpretation of the documentary sources and the topography of the area, which led him to conclude that the drays and the speakers at the Monster Meeting stood further east of the eastern boundary of the proposed extent of registration and that the current course of Golden Point Road runs through the area which would have been the centre of the gathering of people at the Monster Meeting. Mr Petrusma submitted that the rise on which the drays and the speakers stood at the Monster Meeting was located approximately 40 metres further east of the eastern boundary of the proposed extent of registration. Mr Petrusma submitted that illustrations of the Monster Meeting, including the David Tulloch sketch, show that the dray and the speakers were located towards the top of the nearby Ammans Hill to the east of the current course of Golden Point Road and to the east of the proposed extent of registration.?He also considered that a professional surveyor should verify the location based on the 1853 survey plans.Discussion and conclusionThe Committee agrees with the Executive Director that the location of the confluence of Forest and Wattle Creeks and the location of the Shepherd’s Hut are appropriate reference points in determining the probable location of the Monster Meeting site. The Committee agrees with all parties that the 1853 map is most probably accurate in showing the location of the Shepherd’s Hut as approximately 70 metres east of the confluence of Forest and Wattle Creeks. Having regard to the descriptions in the documentary evidence, the Committee is of the view that the Shepherd’s Hut is the key landmark in determining the location of the site of the December 1851 Monster Meeting. The Committee notes that the drays were probably located at the Monster Meeting site temporarily and, as movable objects, cannot be relied upon to determine the entire location of the Monster Meeting. In noting the difficulty in determining the location of the drays on 15 December 1851 the Committee also notes the potential for a wide variety of interpretations of the illustrations, including the David Tulloch sketch, and the potential for ‘artistic license’ particularly in the translation of a plein-air sketch to an engraving plate, a stylised depiction of the event and inaccuracies in perspective, foreshortening and geographical identifiers. The Committee is of the view that the exact location of the dray which speakers at the Monster Meeting stood upon cannot be determined with complete certainty but finds that, by reference to comparative analysis of the documentary resources available, the recommended extent of registration includes the most likely location of the Shepherd’s Hut, the most likely location of the dray which stood nearby and upon which speakers stood, and, on the evidence, enough land to accommodate the approximately 10,000 - 15,000 diggers who gathered on 15 December 1851 for the Monster Meeting. Although it is likely that the area occupied by those attending the meeting may have extended beyond the extent of proposed registration, the Committee is confident that the land of the proposed registration includes the epicentre of the Monster Meeting site and that this is able to be interpreted in the landscape.The Committee determines to include in the Victorian Heritage Register the extent of registration proposed in the Recommendation (see Attachment 2).Statement of Cultural Heritage Significance and other registration informationSubmissions and evidenceThe Executive Director included a proposed Statement of Significance in the Recommendation and a number of parties made submissions suggesting certain amendments and additions.Mr Braybrook, Mr Petrusma and Mr Ellis all made submissions relating to the history of the Monster Meeting and to the history of the discovery of its probable location.Discussion and conclusionThe Committee notes the submissions and evidence given as part of this hearing relating to the proposed Statement of Cultural Heritage Significance for the Place. The Committee is of the view that some reference should be made to the history of the term ‘Monster Meeting’ and that the history of the use of the term as it relates to Ireland should be noted in the registration of the Place. The Committee determines, for the sake of clarity, that the Statement of Significance be revised to provide context of the evolution of the Monster Meeting and that the role of the first meeting was preparatory, while the second meeting was the protest.The Committee agrees with Mr Petrusma that the 13 December 1851 decision of Governor La Trobe to revoke the increase in the licence fee and the gazettal of this decision on 17 December 1851 should be more clearly noted in the history of the Place. The Committee recognises that several of the parties to the hearing and others in the local community have been involved since the early 2000s in the search for, re-discovery and recognition of the site of the December 1851 Monster Meeting and the Committee commends all parties to the hearing for their dedication and contribution over time to the recognition of the Monster Meeting Site. ?The Committee Determines that the registration information for the Place should be changed to remove the reference to 2010 and to note that the activities leading to “rediscovery” commenced from the early 2000s.The Committee determines to amend the Statement of Cultural Heritage Significance and other registration information as proposed by the Recommendation and appends Attachment 2 to reflect its determination as to the matters above (see Attachment 2).CONCLUSIONThe Committee determines in accordance with s 42(1)(a) of the Heritage Act 1995 that the Place, being the Monster Meeting Site at Golden Point Road, Golden Point, is of cultural heritage significance to the State of Victoria and warrants inclusion in the Victorian Heritage Register on the basis that it meets the State-level threshold for inclusion in the Register under Criterion A. In response to submissions made, the Committee amends the Statement of Significance proposed by the Recommendation in order to better reflect the history and characteristics of the Place and its significance. Changes made to the Statement of Significance are shown in Attachment 2 as appended to this report (see Attachment 2).The extent of registration comprises the whole of the Place and is detailed in Attachment 2 as appended to this report (see Attachment 2).The Committee commends all parties to the hearing for their submissions and evidence and on their contribution to this hearing process. The Committee’s inquisitorial process was greatly assisted by all parties and their submissions.ATTACHMENT 1?HERITAGE COUNCIL CRITERIA FOR ASSESSMENT OF PLACES OF CULTURAL HERITAGE SIGNIFICANCE??CRITERION ?AImportance to the course, or pattern, of Victoria’s cultural history?CRITERION ?BPossession of uncommon, rare or endangered aspects of Victoria’s cultural history.?CRITERION ?CPotential to yield information that will contribute to an understanding of Victoria’s cultural history. ?CRITERION ?DImportance in demonstrating the principal characteristics of a class of cultural places or environments. ?CRITERION ?EImportance in exhibiting particular aesthetic characteristics. ?CRITERION ?FImportance in demonstrating a high degree of creative or technical achievement at a particular period. ?CRITERION ?GStrong or special association with a particular community or cultural group for social, cultural or spiritual reasons. This includes the significance of a place to Indigenous peoples as part of their continuing and developing cultural traditions. ?CRITERION ?HSpecial association with the life or works of a person, or group of persons, of importance in Victoria’s history. ???These were adopted by the Heritage Council at its meeting on 7 August 2008, and replace the previous criteria adopted by the Heritage Council on 6 March 1997.4876800000ATTACHMENT 2 NAMEMONSTER MEETING SITELOCATIONGOLDEN POINT ROAD, GOLDEN POINTVHR NUMBER:H2368HERMES NUMBER:123107EXTENT OF REGISTRATIONThe extent of registration of place or object name in the Victorian Heritage Register affects the whole place shown on Diagram 2368 including the land, historical archaeology, and other features. All of the place shown hatched on Diagram 2368 encompassing all of Crown Allotments 49-55, 55A, and 145F, Section E Parish of Chewton, parts of Crown Allotments 145E and 146A Section E Parish of Chewton, part of Crown Allotment 2005 Parish of Chewton and part of the road reserve for Ottery Street.AERIAL PHOTO OF THE PLACE SHOWING EXTENT OF REGISTRATIONSTATEMENT OF CULTURAL HERITAGE SIGNIFICANCEHistory SummaryIn the first week of July 1851, Victoria separated from New South Wales and became a colony in its own right. In the same week, gold was discovered in the new colony. Attempting to slow the rush of workers to the gold fields, and generate revenue, Governor La Trobe introduced a licence fee of 30 shillings per month for the right to mine for gold, effective from 1 September 1851. Even when enforced, the licence system did little to slow the rush, and by the end of November 1851, diggers were leaving their jobs in cities, towns and on pastoral stations and travelling to the gold fields in their thousands. On 1 December 1851 Governor La Trobe issued a proclamation which proposed to double the licence fee to ?3, effective from 1 January 1852. Shortly after, notices appeared along the Forest Creek diggings urging diggers to meet and object to the proposed increase. During the following days a meeting of up to 3,000 people was held to establish the day and location of the Monster Meeting or the Great Meeting as it was originally known. The Monster Meeting, of approximately 10,000 to 15,000 diggers, took place on 15 December 1851, at the Shepherd’s Hut, Forest Creek. Two days later the government announced that the licence fee increase had been revoked, although Governor La Trobe’s decision to revoke the licence fee increase had been made on 13 December 1851, two days prior to the Monster Meeting. The gold licencing system continued to be a point of contention and continued objections led to the Red Ribbon Rebellion in Bendigo in 1853 and ultimately to the Eureka Stockade in Ballarat in 1854. Description SummaryThe Monster Meeting Site is located on the northern outskirts of the township of Chewton, in the locality of Golden Point, near the confluence of Forest and Wattle Creeks. It is surrounded by the Castlemaine Diggings National Heritage Park (VHR H2407), but was not part of the Park in 2017. The site itself consists of grassed land across a shallow rise, which falls away towards Forest and Wattle Creeks. A large corrugated iron shed, a cattle yard and fencing are located on the site and a Monster Meeting commemorative monument is located to the south of the shed, on the recommended land. This site is part of the traditional land of the Dja Dja Wurrung. What is significant?The Monster Meeting Site including all the land identified in Diagram 2368. The modern structures including the shed, cattle yard, and fencing are not of significance.How is it significant? The Monster Meeting Site is of historical significance to the State of Victoria. It satisfies the following criteria for inclusion in the Victorian Heritage Register:Criterion AImportance to the course, or pattern, of Victoria’s cultural history.Why is it significant? The Monster Meeting Site is significant at the State level for the following reasons:The Monster Meeting Site is historically significant as the location of the first organised mass protest meeting objecting to the gold licencing system in Colonial Victoria. It was also the first time workers had stood united in protest against the government. This meeting was the precursor to the Red Ribbon Rebellion (1853) and the Eureka Stockade (1854) which led to the introduction of the more democratic Miners Right. The Monster Meeting Site is located in what was one of the most productive gold mining areas in Victoria, and is historically significant for its association with the development of Victoria through the discovery of gold, and for its association with the beginnings of democracy in Victoria. [Criterion A]OTHER LEVELS OF SIGNIFICANCEThe Monster Meeting Site is also significant for the following reasons, but not at the State level:The Monster Meeting Site is of social significance at a local level. A special association is evidenced by regular engagement with the Monster Meeting Site by community members and historians whose research activities, since the early 2000s, led to rediscovery of the location of the site. Since then, a website, publications and CDs of original songs have been produced, and performances have been held at the place. The Ballarat Reform League Inc. has erected a monument at the place, where events are held annually on the anniversary of the Monster Meeting. PERMIT POLICYPreambleThe purpose of the Permit Policy is to assist when considering or making decisions regarding works to a registered place. It is recommended that any proposed works be discussed with an officer of Heritage Victoria prior to making a permit application. Discussing proposed works will assist in answering questions the owner may have and aid any decisions regarding works to the place. The extent of registration of the Monster Meeting Site in the Victorian Heritage Register affects the whole place shown on Diagram 2368 including the land, landscape elements and other features. Under the Heritage Act 1995 a person must not remove or demolish, damage or despoil, develop or alter or excavate, relocate or disturb the position of any part of a registered place or object without approval. It is acknowledged, however, that alterations and other works may be required to keep places and objects in good repair and adapt them for use into the future. If a person wishes to undertake works or activities in relation to a registered place or registered object, they must apply to the Executive Director, Heritage Victoria for a permit. The purpose of a permit is to enable appropriate change to a place and to effectively manage adverse impacts on the cultural heritage significance of a place as a consequence of change. If an owner is uncertain whether a heritage permit is required, it is recommended that Heritage Victoria be contacted. Permits are required for anything which alters the place or object, unless a permit exemption is granted. Permit exemptions usually cover routine maintenance and upkeep issues faced by owners as well as minor works or works to the elements of the place or object that are not significant. They may include appropriate works that are specified in a conservation management plan. Permit exemptions can be granted at the time of registration (under s.42 of the Heritage Act) or after registration (under s.66 of the Heritage Act).It should be noted that the addition of new buildings to the registered place, as well as alterations to the interior and exterior of existing buildings requires a permit, unless a specific permit exemption is granted.Conservation management plansIt is recommended that a Conservation Management Plan is developed to manage the place in a manner which respects its cultural heritage significance.Aboriginal cultural heritageIf any Aboriginal cultural heritage is discovered or exposed at any time it is necessary to immediately contact Aboriginal Victoria to ascertain requirements under the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006. Human remainsIf any suspected human remains are found during any works or activities, the works or activities must cease. The remains must be left in place, and protected from harm or damage. Victoria Police and the State Coroner’s Office must be notified immediately. If there are reasonable grounds to believe that the remains are Aboriginal, the Coronial Admissions and Enquiries hotline must be contacted immediately on 1300 888 544. As required under s.17(3)(b) of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 all details about the location and nature of the human remains must be provided to the Secretary (as defined in the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006).Other approvalsPlease be aware that approval from other authorities (such as local government) may be required to undertake works.ArchaeologyGround disturbance may affect the archaeological deposits at the place and, subject to the exemptions stated in this document, requires a permit. Cultural heritage significanceOverview of significanceAll of the land identified in Diagram 2368 is of primary cultural heritage significance. The cultural heritage significance of the Monster Meeting Site lies in the land on which the first major organised protest meeting to protest against increases to the gold licence fee took place. It was also the first time workers had had stood united in protest against the government. This meeting was the precursor to the Red Ribbon Rebellion (1853) and the Eureka Stockade (1854) which led to the introduction of the more democratic Miners Right. The heritage values of the place are evident in the contours of the land, the creek beds and the surrounding hillsides.PERMIT EXEMPTIONS (under section 42 of the Heritage Act)It should be noted that Permit Exemptions can be granted at the time of registration (under s.42(4) of the Heritage Act). Permit Exemptions can also be applied for and granted after registration (under s.66 of the Heritage Act)General Condition 1All exempted alterations are to be planned and carried out in a manner which prevents damage to the fabric of the registered place or object.General Condition 2Should it become apparent during further inspection or the carrying out of works that original or previously hidden or inaccessible details of the place or object are revealed which relate to the significance of the place or object, then the exemption covering such works shall cease and Heritage Victoria shall be notified as soon as possible. General Condition 3All works should ideally be informed by Conservation Management Plans prepared for the place. The Executive Director is not bound by any Conservation Management Plan, and permits still must be obtained for works suggested in any Conservation Management Plan.General Condition 4Nothing in this determination prevents the Heritage Council from amending or rescinding all or any of the permit exemptions.General Condition 5Nothing in this determination exempts owners or their agents from the responsibility to seek relevant planning or building permits from the relevant responsible authority, where applicable.Specific Permit ExemptionsMaintenance of existing vegetation.Removal of plants listed as noxious weeds in the Catchment and Land Protection Act 1994.The removal or pruning of dead or dangerous trees to maintain safety. Weed and vermin control activities. Fire suppression and firefighting duties such as fuel reduction burns and fire control line construction, provided all heritage features and values of the place are protected.Interpretation and safety signage of a modest size provided it does not adversely affect the heritage features and values of the place or obstruct views to and from it.These permit exemptions are consistent with those in the Castlemaine Diggings National Heritage Park (VHR H2407).RELEVANT INFORMATIONLocal Government AuthorityMount Alexander Shire CouncilHERITAGE LISTING INFORMATION Heritage Overlay:HO998 Other listing:Part of the site is already included as part of the Castlemaine Diggings National Heritage Park (VHR H2407).The Castlemaine Diggings National Heritage Park (VHR H2407) is included in the National Heritage List.HISTORYPart 1: Background to gold licenceUnder English law passed in the reign of Queen Elizabeth I, gold and silver was the property of the Crown. If land was purchased from the Crown, it did not include ownership of minerals on that land. The 1850s gold rushes in NSW and Victoria were the first in the British Empire, and as such, there were few precedents in British law to guide governments.Fearing a rebellion and a loss of their political power and workers, authorities and pastoralists did not reveal early gold discoveries. However, when gold was discovered in central NSW in 1851, the resulting gold rush proved unmanageable, and notices served on gold seekers to cease digging went unheeded. When the authorities could not stop the gold rush, they decided to regulate it through a licence system through which gold diggers paid a fee for the right to mine for gold. Part 2: The discovery of gold in Victoria and the introduction of the gold licence systemIn the first week of July 1851, Victoria became a separate Colony from New South Wales, and gold was discovered. On 15 August, Charles La Trobe, the Lieutenant Governor of Victoria followed the lead of NSW and issued a proclamation stating that regulations were being prepared for the issue of licences to mine for gold at a reasonable fee. The regulations were enforceable from 1 September 1851 and required an upfront payment of 30 shillings per month. Licences would be issued only for unalientated Crown land and would be issued on the spot by a commissioner who would determine the size of the claim, initially 8ft x 8ft, but later increased to 12ft x 12ft. In August 1851 gold was discovered at Buninyong south of Ballarat, and for the first time, the Government dispatched a Gold Commissioner to administer the field. Instead of paying the licence fee, gold diggers staged ‘a solemn protest of labour against opposition’ and then simply abandoned the goldfield and moved to a new location. Part 3: The Mount Alexander Gold Rush and gold licence fee increaseBy the end of November 1851, gold had been discovered at Mount Alexander (Forest Creek) which was to become the location of the largest rush seen in Australia. The amount of gold (two tons per week, which in terms of today’s gold price would amount to $1 billion per week) flowing into Melbourne from Mount Alexander, meant the desertion from jobs, and inward migration, could no longer be controlled. The population increased significantly with people arriving from other colonies and from overseas. In an effort to slow the rush, Governor La Trobe declared that from 1 January 1852, the licence fee would be doubled to ?3 per month and that it would not only apply to diggers but to all connected with the search for gold including tent keepers, store keepers and cooks. Notices quickly appeared along the Forest Creek diggings at Mount Alexander urging diggers to meet, agitate for justice and object to the proposed licence fee increase. During the following days a meeting of up to 3,000 people was held to establish the day and location of the Monster Meeting or the Great Meeting as it was originally known.Part 4: The Monster meeting The Monster Meeting, or the Great Meeting as it was originally known, was attended by 10,000 to 15,000 diggers protesting against the increase to the gold licence. Various speakers spoke from the back of a dray, and flags were flown from the trees and raised on poles. One of these flags may have been the precursor to one used at the Red Ribbon Rebellion which depicted scales, a bundle of sticks, and a kangaroo and emu. Although thousands of men attended, the meeting was peaceful. All present agreed not the pay the licence fee. Two days after the Monster Meeting the government announced that the licence fee increase had been revoked, although Governor La Trobe’s decision to revoke the licence fee increase was made on 13 December 1851, two days prior to the Monster Meeting.The term ‘Monster Meeting’ originates from mid-eighteenth century Ireland, and was a term used at that time to describe large protest meetings, generally of Catholics, aimed at mobilising mass support to end the union between Ireland and Britain. Part 5: Location of Monster Meeting, Golden Point, Forest CreekOn 9 December 1851, the Argus reported that ‘bills [were] posted along the Creek calling on diggers to meet this evening at 7 o’clock, near the Post Office to make arrangements for petitioning any increase on the licenses.’ That evening, a meeting of about 3,000 men was held near the Post Office. They formed a committee, and determined to meet with the Commissioner the following morning with the expectation that a meeting of 12,000 to 15,000 men would take place the following Monday 15 December 1851. The location of the Monster Meeting is described in contemporary articles as being held at the Shepherd’s Hut, near the Post Office, about one mile higher up from the Commissioner’s Tents. Maps from the period indicate that these structures are located at both Forest Creek, and nearby Fryers Creek. The meeting was advertised through notices addressed to the Mount Alexander diggers which were posted along the creek. The month before, the Argus reporter described the location of the Mount Alexander goldfields as ‘not on Mount Alexander, as is generally supposed, but in a gully known as Forest Creek.’ In addition, the Argus office was located at Forest Creek and if the meeting was at Fryers Creek, it would be expected that the reporter would have stated this. Speakers and attendees also describe arriving at Forest Creek. Later reminiscences about the meeting recall it being held ‘near an old shepherd’s hut, at the junction of Mount Alexander [Pyrenees Hwy] and a new cut, called the Chewton Road [Golden Point Road] Forest Creek (afterwards named Castlemaine)’; ‘at the old shepherd’s hut, Golden Point, Forest Creek’; and ‘at the Shepherd’s hut near Chewton (a piece of rising ground not far from the Mount Alexander Hotel).’This documentary evidence confirms the location of the Monster Meeting as Forest Creek, which is covered by the area recommended for registration.Part 6: The Red Ribbon Rebellion and the Eureka StockadeThere were a number of subsequent protest meetings against the licencing system and perceived unjust governance of the goldfields. The most significant of these include the Red Ribbon Rebellion (1853) and the Eureka Stockade (1854). In June 1853, the Anti-Gold Licence Association was formed in Bendigo. Delegates took a petition of more than 5000 signatures to Governor La Trobe complaining of hardship on the goldfield. They asked for the licence fee to be reduced, and condemned the harsh treatment of those unable to pay. When the delegates returned on 13 August 1853, they were greeted by thousands of diggers at View Point holding flags of all nations, as well as the diggers’ flag designed by William Dexter, a china painter from Devon. This flag featured a pick, shovel, and cradle; scales; a bundle of sticks; and a kangaroo and emu, and is thought to have first been flown at the Monster Meeting, Forest Creek. The event became known as the Red Ribbon Rebellion, as supporters wore red ribbons to show their solidarity.In 1854, a series of events led to the most well-known gold field protest, the Eureka Stockade where, for the first time, the government used force against the protestors resulting in deaths and injuries on both sides. The catalyst for the Eureka Stockade was the imprisonment of men perceived to be unfairly accused of arson. Diggers met to lobby for their release, protest against the licence and demand the vote. The Ballarat Reform League was formed and at a later meeting, the diggers burnt their licences. On 30 November, diggers met on Bakery Hill and again burnt their licences. They then marched to the Eureka diggings, raised the Southern Cross flag, and constructed the stockade. They were attacked by government troopers and regiments, outnumbered and defeated. Although unsuccessful at the time, the protest eventually resulted in the demise of the gold licence system and the introduction of the more democratic Miner’s Right. VICTORIAN HISTORICAL THEMES04Transforming land and managing natural resources4.5Gold mining07Governing Victorians7.2Struggling for political rightsPHYSICAL DESCRIPTIONAll of the land identified in Diagram 2368 is of primary cultural heritage significanceARCHAEOLOGYThere is no identified archaeology of state level significance at the Monster Meeting Site. Evidence of the Shepherd’s Hut at the south eastern end of the place may survive, although it is likely to have been a lightweight, vernacular structure which would have left few archaeological deposits. INTEGRITY/INTACTNESSIntegrity – The Monster Meeting Site is a comparatively undeveloped parcel of land surrounded by former gold fields. Identifying structures mentioned in early descriptions, including the Shepherd’s Hut and Post Office no longer survive. The heritage values of the place are evident in the contours of the land, the creek beds and the hillock. Intactness – Modern structures and buildings including a shed, cattle yard and fencing have been erected on the site, however they do not interfere with the intactness of the site, which is significant primarily for its location. While some alterations have occurred, the place generally conforms to early descriptions and images. ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download