BACKGROUND INFORMATION Glenburn Precinct (Blocks 16, 30, 60, 71–73, and 94, Kowen) At its meeting of 19 November 2015 the ACT Heritage Council decided that the Glenburn Precinct was eligible for registration, which was further amended by a provisional Further Heritage Decision on 9 February 2017. The information contained in this report was considered by the ACT Heritage Council in assessing the nomination for the Glenburn Precinct against the heritage significance criteria outlined in s10 of the Heritage Act 2004. th
The Glenburn Precinct contains several elements that make up a representation of 19 century rural Australia that has managed to maintain its context through the formation of the Federal Capital Territory. It contains elements that show the changes in land procurement from large grants through to small selections. It contains evidence of mineral exploration, sheep farming and subsistence farming. It shows how a small community formed in the area, centred around the initial land purchase and strengthened by shared resources of the shearing complex and nearby school. This evidence is located in a part of Kowen Forest which has remained largely devoid of development, allowing it to retain the integrity of the cultural landscape. Each of these elements can be seen in Figure 1 and are discussed individually below.
Figure 1 Glenburn Precinct features and pre-FCT blocks
BACKGROUND INFORMATION – GLENBURN PRECINCT – NOVEMBER 2015
General background CULTURAL LANDSCAPES The International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) defines organically evolved cultural landscapes as those that have resulted ‘from an initial social, economic, administrative, and/or religious imperative and has developed its present form by association with and in response to its natural environment. Such landscapes reflect that process of evolution in their form and component features’ (ICOMOS 2009). Organically evolved cultural landscapes may be relict or continuing. In this sense, the Glenburn Precinct is considered a continually evolving organic cultural landscape. It has resulted from an initial social imperative—to access the naturally occurring resources; and has developed its present form by association with, and in response to, the wetlands. Sections of the Precinct continue to be used and evolve, while other parts have become relict. HISTORY Aboriginal history The Aboriginal history of the ACT extends from the present day back many thousands of years, and is evidenced by both the tangible and intangible aspects of Aboriginal culture and history. The earliest evidence of Aboriginal people in the region comes from Birrigai Rock Shelter in Tidbinbilla, dating back to 25,000 years ago. Occupation at Birrigai has been linked to seasonal gatherings of local and regional Aboriginal people who would come together along Aboriginal pathways, involving a series of meetings and ceremonies along the way. European accounts from the midth 19 century tell of groups from the surrounding region meeting at the confluence of the Molonglo and Queanbeyan Rivers on their way to the annual bogong moth feast in the mountains; one inference drawn from this is that these rivers were used as pathways, so it is quite likely that the southern parts of the Glenburn Precinct were often visited by other Aboriginal groups using the established pathway to pass through the land of the local Aboriginal people who continually occupied the entire area over successive generations. The archaeological evidence of Aboriginal occupation in the Precinct is characterised by sparse scatters of artefacts occurring in exposures throughout, becoming more dense with proximity to Glenburn Creek with one site containing over 250 artefacts. Bulbeck & Boot (1990) have suggested that the entire area may be a continuous spread of low-density artefacts becoming denser towards the creek, noting that the smaller creeks appeared to be favoured instead of the larger Molonglo River. This pattern reflects the sustained use of the landscape by local Aboriginal people over time, and also the use of the Molonglo River as an Aboriginal pathway, linking Aboriginal groups in the southern highlands and connecting generations of Aboriginal people over time. Place names in Aboriginal society are important and often ‘allude to mythological stories’ (Koch 2009: 117). The district of Kowen has been spelt in different ways, including , Kowan, Kohan, Coen, Cohen and even Kohn (Cross 1985: 50–51). A phonological reconstruction of Kowen suggests that it was partially derived from the Aboriginal place name for the area, which was ‘kuwain’ (Koch 2009: 152–153). Kuwin was also the first element of the aboriginal Kuwiniyan, from which Queanbeyan was derived, although its meaning is unknown (Koch 2009: 152–153). A reconstruction of Burbong indicates that it was originally Burrbang (Koch 2009: 132). Today, Burbong is a word that is associated with the rites of passage of male initiation. There is a large amount of Aboriginal cultural heritage spread across the precinct that marks the initial human occupation of the place. While this heritage assessment deals primarily with European history, the Aboriginal history of the place is acknowledged. Additionally, it should be noted that all Aboriginal sites in the ACT are protected under the Heritage Act 2004 regardless of their status on the ACT Heritage Register. European history The Kowen area is covered by the parish of Amungula. Remnant buildings, ruins, fences, exotic vegetation, a graveyard and other structures are evidence of a rural settlement that grew organically in the hinterland of the regional centre of Queanbeyan.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION – GLENBURN PRECINCT – NOVEMBER 2015 INITIAL EUROPEAN SETTLEMENT – 1831 The development of the settlement can be separated into two major phases. The first commenced in 1831 at ‘Dirty Swamp’ on Glenburn Creek and predates the proclamation of Queanbeyan as a town in 1838. At that time Queanbeyan had a population of around 50, a resident magistrate and a post office that had opened two years earlier (McAlister 2007: 3). The 1841 Census shows ‘Cowen’ with a population of six in one wooden dwelling (McAlister 2007: 3). The Limestone Plains, i.e. east of the Murrumbidgee River with Kowen further east still, was just inside the ‘limits of location’ and was part of the nineteen counties identified in 1829 within which early settlers could officially purchase or lease land; it was from these conditions that the pattern of settlement developed into several large holdings that were subsequently added to (Pearson 2002). The early system of land tenure underwent several rapid changes that were enacted under Orders in Council. From 1831 it was only possible to purchase land via public auction, however the auctions were at the behest of those wishing to purchase the land and it could be arranged so that there was often no other bidders, with the land often selling for the ‘upset price’. It was under this system, that James Atkinson purchased Portion 1, the first freehold land in the parish. It is likely that Luke Colverwell was already squatting in the area, probably as an employee of Atkinson, prior to this first purchase. EARLY EXPANSION OF EUROPEAN SETTLEMENT AND ‘THE ROBERTSON LAND ACTS’ OF 1861 There has been a great deal of debate over why the Crown Lands Alienation Act 1861 and Crown Lands Occupation Act 1861 (i.e. the Robertson Lands Acts ) were created. A commonly held view is that they were to allow for the working poor to acquire some land and independence, while others suggest it was to establish an agrarian population side by side with the pastoralists, allowing for the country to become more self-reliant (CBCS 1911 238; Baker 1967: 104). Baker argued their intent was really to establish and entrench middle-class values and push out the old bourgeoisies(1967: 104; see also Waterhouse 2006: 67). This was done by the Acts giving equal opportunity to selectors, thus diminishing the great privileges that the squatters had previously enjoyed. This was not so much about putting people on the land, but about giving farmers the opportunity to go out and select their own land without intervention, as the squatters were doing (Baker 1967: 122–123). The Acts do not provide assistance for farmers to acquire land – it simply gave them the ability rather than the means (Baker 1967: 123). Stuart (2007: 44) notes that whatever their motivations, the Acts were the principal means of unlocking the land and left their mark on the landscape. The Robertson Land Acts had a major impact in the way people moved onto the land which is still visible today. However they were not considered to be very successful and several later Acts were passed in an attempt to fix problems. The first major Act was the Crown Lands Act 1884 and the regulations of 1889, then the Crown Lands Acts 1895, the Labour Settlements Act 1902, the Closer Settlement Acts 1904 (which has kindred Acts, such as the Village Settlements and Small Holdings Act) and the Closer Settlement Promotion Act 1910. All of these Acts tried to maintain some level of tenure for existing pastoralists while still opening up land for smaller agrarian holdings(CBCS 1911: 238). Even with later acts and amendments trying to make things better for selectors, by 1897 the NSW Undersecretary for Lands estimated that of the 110,000 selections that had been made, only a quarter were still in the hands of the original selectors, suggesting the failure of many farms and/or a widespread practice of pastoralists obtaining land purchases through family, friends and employees, - an illegitimate process colloquially termed ‘dummying’ (Waterhouse 2006: 69). Following the introduction of the 1861 Land Acts there was an increase in numbers of people who settled in the Kowen area for the purpose of grazing stock. This settlement extended south towards the northern banks of the Molonglo in an area known as Burbong. The pattern of settlement in the Kowen district was probably also influenced by gold and copper prospecting in the 1850s due to the proximity of the Gundaroo gold mining area to the north and the copper, gold, zinc, and silver mining operations in Captains Flat to the south. This is evidenced by several attempts at mineral prospecting in the area (both on the ground observations and notes in leases). Holdings in the area were also owned by absentee landholders, including the Campbell family. At one point it was thought by some that with the inn located nearby en-route to the goldfields, the Hibernian Hotel, and the proposed railway possibly going from Sutton to Queanbeyan (which did not eventuate), it would be a good investment to buy land in Kowen, but when the railway was built the route went through Bungendore with no stations or sidings near Kowen and the Hibernian Hotel closed in 1887 (Folger 1998:43, Williams 2008: 62) 3
BACKGROUND INFORMATION – GLENBURN PRECINCT – NOVEMBER 2015 The boost in population mostly came about from an expansion of holdings by absentee land owners requiring workers th to live on the properties and the introduction of the Robertson Land Acts. However, by the end of the 19 century there were relatively few people in the area (McAlister 2007: 3–4). This is likely a result of the poor quality of the land and a series of droughts across NSW in the late 1880s culminating in the major drought and subsequent depression of 1895-1903, making it too difficult for small farmers to sustain themselves in the area (ABS 1988). Cross and Sheady (1983:49) note 83 inhabitants in 24 households in the ‘Cohen’ area in the 1891 census, which McAlister (2007: 36–37) has narrowed down to 57 people in 8 households within 3.5km of the school and only 18 people in three households in the area. Most of the land in Kowen, including the land encompassing the Glenburn Precinct, was resumed by the Commonwealth after the formation of the Federal Capital. This was announced in 1915 and became official in 1918. The resumed lands were then offered back to the original owners as leases. (McAlister 2007: 5) In 1927, much of the Kowen area was planted with pines as part of a timber-producing programme for the ACT. The area was considered to be poor grazing land and not favourable for growing crops. Although not as productive as other areas, the pine forest is the largest remaining plantation in the ACT after the 2003 bushfires had destroyed much of the ACT’s other pine plantations to the west and south of the Territory. In 1927 the Kowen area had 200 acres of land approved for clearing for softwood plantation and firewood forest (The Canberra Times 6/1/1927 8 This was downgraded to 100 acres a few months later due to a difficulty in obtaining seed supplies from overseas (The Canberra Times 21/6/1927: 1). By 1970 the area surrounding the Glenburn Precinct, but not the rural landscape of the Precinct, was planted with pine trees(McAlister 2007: 5). Most of the area subsequently became plantation forest and much of the built landscape was destroyed (McAlister 2007: 6). DESCRIPTION Geology Geologically, the Precinct is situated within the Cullarin Block within the Pittman Formation between two fault lines, the Queanbeyan Fault in the west and the Whiskers Fault in the east. The area is formed by interbedded sandstone, siltstone, shale and minor black shale, chert and impure calcareous sandstone with distal quartz turbidites. The valley extends in a north-easterly direction from the Molonglo River and is now surrounded by pine plantations. The area of the open cultural landscape is approximately 3km long and 1km at its widest point, covering roughly 145 hectares. The ephemeral Glenburn Creek runs through the valley, from its source northeast near the ACT/NSW border, to its termination southwest in the Molonglo River. Due to the boggy nature of the valley, most of the built features are found on raised areas surrounding wetland areas (Dowling & Cosgrove 2002: 5; EMA 2008: 18). Vegetation The Kowen area has been extensively cleared over the past 180 years. The first phase commenced during the initial European settlement of the area, where the region was cleared for grazing. The second phase occurred during the establishment of the Federal Capital Territory, where the area was cleared for the planting of pine forest (EMA 2008: 18). Prior to the clearing, the general vegetation of the uplands comprised three main communities: savannah and open savannah grasslands, and dry sclerophyll forest in the higher slopes of the region (EMA 2008: 18). CONDITION The NCDC’s (1988: 44) Sites of Significance in the ACT, notes that the Precinct retains its, ‘rural atmosphere in the valley (despite the plantations) and the highly visible nature of the historical remains. The gravesite particularly conveys a convincing sense of the tragedy and isolation that must have accompanied the death and burial of the Colverwell sisters. The shearing shed and associated buildings also comprise an authentic illustration of the business of sheep shearing on an isolated property’. In 2015, the Glenburn Precinct displays a low to moderate level of integrity across the various built cultural heritage components when considered individually. However it displays a high level of integrity as a cultural landscape. Whilst many of the individual buildings are in a poor, dilapidated, or ruined state the area surrounding and connecting them 4
BACKGROUND INFORMATION – GLENBURN PRECINCT – NOVEMBER 2015 has remained as farming land, and the connections between each element can be clearly seen, allowing the landscape to be th read in its 19 century rural context.
Glenburn Homestead Cross (1985: 49) notes that the area has been known by various other names in the past, including: Kowen Creek, Kowen, Kohan, Cohen, Kohn, The Swamp, Dirty Swamp, Glenbirnie and Glenburn. Today, the Glenburn Homestead structures, the Glenburn Shearing Shed & Quarters and the Colverwell Graves are within Block 72, which is part of historical Portion 1.
Portion 1 sales (from McAlister 2007:37-38): • 1836 (granted 1837) – James Atkinson • 1840 – Luke Colverwell • 1861 – John James Wright • 1866 – Martin Byrne • 1869 – Byrne transfers property to Real Property Act (title to go to George Campbell) • 1871 – Certificate of Title to George Campbell • 1887 – Charles Campbell, Robert Campbell Close and James Scroggie • 1888 – Robert Campbell Close and James Scroggie • 1890 – new title to Robert Campbell Close and James Scroggie due to new survey showing land to be 1,332 acres (not 1,270 as previous) • 1891 – John James Edmonds • 1905 – above leases land to McInnes Bros • 1915 – acquired by the Commonwealth, leased back to J J Edmonds, then parts leased to McInnes family since.
The land tenure history of Portion 1, upon which stands the present Glenburn Homestead, is complex. The Colverwells initially squatted in the northern area of this block. It was later sold to James Atkinson (Bulbeck and Boot 1990: 21; McAlister 2007: 3). As Bulbeck and Boot (1990: 21) observed, the relevant portion plans only show the names ‘James Atkinson, now George Campbell’, and ‘James Atkinson, (now) F. Campbell’ as the owners of Portion 1. However, for a short period, the portion was owned by Luke Colverwell, John James Wright and then Martin Byrne. McAlister (2007: 3–4) suggests that the Colverwells might have squatted on this portion for Atkinson or for James Richard Styles. Colverwell purchased the portion from Atkinson in August 1840 and may have worked for Atkinson until he purchased the property. Meanwhile, in 1849, Colverwell purchased 3,739 acres in the Burbong area, located on the southern side of the Molonglo River (Cross and Sheedy 1983: 12). McAlister contends that the Colverwells would have worked Portion 1 and their holdings in Burbong until they sold Portion 1 to James Wright in 1860. Martin Byrne purchased the land in 1866. Both Wright and Byrne were absentee landowners (McAlister 2007: 4). At this time, Luke Colverwell was still listed as living at Glenburn. In 1869, Martin Byrne applied to purchase the land under the Torrens land tenure system. On his application, he stated that the land was occupied by George Campbell, except a small hut and a few acres that Luke Colverwell lived on even after his lease had expired. The title was then transferred to George Campbell in June 1871. McAlister (2007: 4) suggests that Colverwell had an arrangement with Campbell and it is possible that he might have lived on the property until he passed away in 1876. George Campbell died in 1881. His will, dated 1876, bequeathed all of his assets to John and Charles Campbell and named Robert Campbell Close as business manager and manager of Duntroon (Sydney Morning Herald 1907: 5). Robert Campbell Close was the son of Edward Close, a migrant from India. Robert’s sister was married to George Campbell. In 1886, James Scroggie was appointed a trustee in place of John Campbell. He entered a partnership with Scroggie and formed Close, Scroggie and Company. According to the Parish Map of Amungula 1909, they owned over 20 portions in the parish, totalling over 1,350 acres. Robert Campbell Close died in 1901.James Scroggie died in 1911. In 1891, John James Edmonds bought Portion 1 from Robert Campbell Close and James Scroggie (McAlister 2007: 8). It has been suggested that John James Edmonds had the slab and pisé huts built for his family at this time, but it is possible they existed earlier to this, and they lived on this Portion until 1905 (McAlister 2007: 8). The Edmonds moved to Glencoe in 1906 (McAlister 2013b: 14). The occupational history of Dirty Swamp and Burbong In 1831, Portion 1 was the first place in Kowen to be settled by Luke Colverwell and his wife, Mary Danahy (Bulbeck & Boot 1990: 21). Luke Colverwell (1795–1876) arrived in Australia a convict. At the age of 18, Luke was charged and st found guilty of stealing the gelding of a surgeon on the 31 October 1810 at the Old Bailey, also known as the Central Criminal Court, situated in London (McAlister 2007: 3). For this crime, he was sentenced to death, but was instead transported to Australia on the ship Guilford (McAlister 2007: 3). After serving his time in Australia, he was granted a conditional pardon on 28 November 1821. In 1828 he was employed as a stock-keeper by James Richard Styles of 5
BACKGROUND INFORMATION – GLENBURN PRECINCT – NOVEMBER 2015 ‘Reevesdale’, in the Parish of Bungonia (County of Argyle) in the Goulburn area. Styles also held land at Gundaroo which is where Colverwell met his wife Mary Danahy. They were married on 28 May 1831 in the Parish of Inverary, located east of Bungonia (McAlister 2007: 3). Mary Danahy, born in Ireland in 1799, was also a convict. She was sentenced for seven years in the Court of Tralee Ireland and was later transported to the New Colony at the age of 30 arriving in Sydney Cove on 12 November 1828 on the ship City of Edinburgh (McAlister 2005, 4; 2007: 3). They had six children: Elizabeth (1831), Margaret (1832), Eliza (1835), Mary (1836), Jane (1839) and Luke (1841). After their marriage, Luke and Mary squatted on land at Dirty Swamp designated as Portion 1 of Parish of Amungula. The family lived in a primitive hut located on the banks of Glenburn Creek, near the site of the Colverwell graveyard (McAlister 2007: 3). The family were the only residents of Kowen for ‘many years’ (McAlister 2007: 3). The 1841 census referred to six people and one wooden dwelling at ‘Cowen’. The people were Luke and his wife, Margaret, and their children, Mary, Eliza, Jane and Luke. The Colverwell family moved to the Burbong area to the south after selling the property in 1861. Alexander ‘Sandy’ McDonald lived in the area from the early 1860s. Alexander McDonald owned 1280 acres of land, an estate called Glenkowan, situated between Bungendore and Queanbeyan between 1855 and 1863 (Cross 1985: 50; Scarlett, Cross and Sheedy 1978: 1–3, McAlister 2007: 4). In 1863, this property was purchased by George Campbell (Cross 1985: 50). In 1869, it was reported that Alexander had become bankrupt. At that time, he was a shepherd at Dirty Swamp. McAlister (2007: 4) comments that it is possible that ‘he continued to live at Glenkowan as a tenant until his death in 1876’, which seems likely given the Queanbeyan Age report on 25 September 1875 noted above, of a Mr A McDonald having a fall on his way home to Glenkowen. Bob McInnes married Florence Jane (Toss) Smith in 1919. He and his brothers, Charles and George, formed a partnership known as the ‘McInnes Bros.’, and together they amassed large land holdings in the region (Dowling and Cosgrove 2002: 10; Folger 1998: 17). Bob acquired the leases of several blocks at Kowen, including Block 14 containing the Glenburn Homestead and the woolshed, although it is unlikely that he ever lived there himself. Block 14 (later to become part of Block 13, currently Block 72) was owned by J. J. Edmonds prior to the formation of the Federal Capital Territory. In 1911, the year that the Federal Capital Territory came into effect, J. J. Edmonds tried to sell his property to the Federal Government which was the only option at the time. The Federal Government arranged for the valuer F. W. Moriarty to conduct a valuation of the property in 1913 (Dowling & Cosgrove 2002:1112). Moriarty’s assessment notes 55 acres of cleared lands, which corresponds to the ploughlands along the northern edge of the Precinct. Two further valuations were done on the property, one by CWB King in 1914, and one by R. Futter in December 1914 (Dowling & Cosgrove 2002: 11). The pasturage was described as ‘Good but rabbits numerous’. It was suitable for ‘raising sheep’, with a carrying capacity of 2 acres to one sheep; after effecting improvements, the capacity would be one acre to one sheep. It was not until May 1915 that the land was acquired by the Commonwealth (Cosgrove & Dowling 2002: 11). After the Commonwealth resumed the land in 1916, Bob McInnes started his first five year lease and later added to it with leases from surrounding properties. The McInnes family has continued leasing properties in the area from the th st 19 into the 21 century (Dowling & Cosgrove 2002: 12). The McInnes family’s lease was quite large at one stage, stretching from Sutton Road to Bungendore Road. The area th they leased has been reduced by the Forestry Department throughout the mid-20 century. However, as the Precinct area was not planted the area has been continually leased by the McInnes family and remained in use as a sheep and cattle grazing property (Dowling & Cosgrove 202: 12). In 1922, Bob McInnes added a ‘sweating shed’, improved the yards to the woolshed as well as built the sheep dip and yards 500m to the west of the woolshed (Dowling & Cosgrove 2002: 12). Norman McInnes, son of Bob McInnes, was born at nearby Kowen Homestead in 1920. His brother, Dick McInnes, was born in 1922. The brothers took over the agistment lease of Block 13 from their father. Norman died in 1993 and Dick took over the lease. Ken McInnes, Dick’s son, took over the running of the property (Dowlin & Cosgrove 2002: 12-13). th
The Glenburn Homestead has been used as a family home and as accommodation for shearers, but during the 20 Century it was mainly been used as storage for farming equipment (McAlister 2013a).
BACKGROUND INFORMATION – GLENBURN PRECINCT – NOVEMBER 2015 DESCRIPTION The Glenburn Homestead comprises two small buildings sitting within a fence that encompasses the former perimeter of the homestead yards (the homestead yard fencing was removed in 2015). Prior to the NCDC’s conservation works in the 1970s, the fence comprised timber posts with large timber logs for corner posts. It had seven strands of wire with wire mesh attached to the outside. There were three large pine trees associated with the yard, two in the northern corner and one just outside the southeast boundary. All three trees have been cut down, but the substantial stumps remain. The eastern building is a four room pisé house. The western building is a two room wood slab cottage with a later lean-to extension on the western side (there is evidence that there were further lean-to extensions, but these are non-extant).The date of construction for the two structures is unclear with arguments from different th sources suggesting anywhere between the 1860s to the early 20 century. The earlier dates are based on comparisons with other structures, while the later dates are based on the 1891 census and oral histories. While it is difficult to discern precisely when they were built, McAlister (2007) argues that they were built towards the end of the th 19 century with the slab hut being the first structure, following by the pisé house within a few years.
Figure 2 Glenburn Homestead measured drawings. (Jeffries 1978, cited in Dowling & Cosgrove 2002:14)
Pisé house All that remains of the original structural fabric of this building is the external and internal pisé walls; the original roof and supporting structure is nonextant. Pisé is a cheap building construction style that was introduced into Australia in the 1820s (Lewis 2000: 51). First a timber framed mould is constructed on top of a stone or brick base layer (which protects the wall from moisture) and then earth is poured in about 10–15cm thick and then rammed into the mould until it is hard enough that a hammer will only leave a small dent when struck against the top surface, then another 10–15cm of soil is spread on top and the process repeated until the mould has been filled. When the mould has been filled, it is moved up and the process
Figure 3 Glenburn Homestead Pisé Cottage southeast facade 7 (ACT Heritage 2013)
BACKGROUND INFORMATION – GLENBURN PRECINCT – NOVEMBER 2015 repeated until the full height of the wall is reached. The building can be used as soon as it has been erected with the walls being able to support heavy loads, such as roof structures. However, the walls must be allowed to dry for several months before they can be plastered, providing a pleasing finish that also helps to protect the walls from moisture. The walls of the pisé structure are original; approximately 30cm thick and have been rendered. The walls were originally covered in a lime render, but it has weathered across most of the surfaces, exposing the pisé matrix underneath. The exposed pisé reveals the impressions left by the formwork during construction. The largest cracks in the walls have occurred where the different sections join each other as the construction method leaves these areas as weak points. The footings for the walls are local rock laid in a single random rubble course with soft local sand cement. The southwest and southeast walls have suffered extensive weathering at their bases and as a consequence threaten the stability of the structure. An example of this extreme deterioration can be seen at the base of the southeast wall where deterioration of the pisé matrix has caused complete penetration into the interior. The floor, originally wooden on stumps (Appendix A) is of earth throughout, which has recently been topped up with about 15cm of decomposed granite gravel. A brick chimney and internal fireplace are in the centre of the southern wall. The internal fireplace is open and the bricks have been whitewashed. Two pieces of iron support an archway of brick above the opening. Holes at either side above the fireplace indicate there was probably a mantle shelf in place but it no longer exists. The windows are timber framed, although there is no glass or covering remaining. There was a verandah along the southeastern facade of the building, but all that is left are some remnant posts or depressions to indicate where they once were. There is a self-supported roof covering the pisé house that was installed during 1978 restoration work. However, there is no evidence remaining of the original roof structure. Historical photos of the ruins still contain some of the roof structure, which looks similar to that of the slab building, with the rafters and joists spacing suggesting a corrugated iron cladding. This is backed up by the valuation by Moriarty (Appendix A) which noted an iron roof as well pine ceilings in two rooms as well as pine flooring. Commonwealth funding in 2009 allowed a major conservation project to be undertaken at the Glenburn Homestead. The Pisé house had bulges in the walls corrected and major cracks filled in. The walls were then braced with metal rods and capped with concrete. The slab hut had a significant lean corrected, footings stabilised with concrete, an internal metal bracing structure erected and several timbers replaced. (Roberts 2010) Although the structure is at present stable, it cannot be said that it is in good condition. During the restoration program a large crack from top to bottom of the northern wall was braced with a metal tie and the western and eastern walls have been braced to stop outward leaning using a series of wire and rod ties. Even though this has supported these walls and the structure as a whole for 26 years, there is an urgent need to protect against the basal erosion of the southern corner wall sections of the building. These are slowly but relentlessly being eroded away. Additionally, while previous conservation works were done with the best intentions, the use of stiff concrete and metal rods within the pisé matrix may cause differential movement between the different materials and is likely to exacerbate existing faults. Slab hut The slab hut appears to have originally been a two room cottage with a later addition of a skillion along the northwest side. There was likely to have been additional rooms or a verandah on either side of the skillion as indicated by remnant posts. During the conservation works some of the weathered original timbers were replaced. Dowling & Cosgrove (2002: 15) suggest that the original timber was probably obtained locally from scribbly Gum (Eucalyptus rossii) that would have originally formed part of the native vegetation in the area before it was cleared. Over time the timbers have shrunk and the building has shifted, opening a gap between the timbers. There have been several attempts to plug the holes with Figure 4 Glenburn Homestead Slab Cottage (ACT various materials, from metal sheeting nailed between Heritage 2013) 8
BACKGROUND INFORMATION – GLENBURN PRECINCT – NOVEMBER 2015 slabs along the southwest and southeast walls, to grass and paper for internal walls. One fragment of newspaper remaining on the wall of the west room shows a date of 1899. The roof is constructed of sapling bush poles with sawn joists supporting corrugated iron roofing. It is assumed that the original roof cladding was corrugated iron due to the spacing of the ceiling joists, and at the time of its construction corrugated iron was becoming a popular building material. It is likely that this was the material used. The floor is of timber planks replaced during the restoration programme. The windows are timber framed with a mixture of adze-cut and newer sawn wood. The machined wood sections were added during conservation works. Glass fragments indicate the presence of glass windows, which are no longer in position. The fireplace and chimney is located on the southwest wall. It is made out of sandstock brick and joined by the same type of soft mortar that was used for the stone footings of the pisé house. The materials are of a low quality with many of the bricks being poorly fired and crumbling and the mortar has weathered away, creating large gaps and significant cracking through the structure. The top of the chimney has previously fallen and the bricks have been collected and piled within the fireplace. The internal walls still contain remnants of the original wall coverings. Some of these include wallpaper, newspapers, canvas, tar paper and grass. The Friends of Glenburn have installed a protective cover over some of these remnant sections that shows the layering of the various materials.
Glenburn hay/machinery shed and yards site The Glenburn Hay/Machinery Shed and Yards Site is located about 30 metres to the north-east of the Glenburn Homestead. Little of the structural fabric remains. It was described by Futter in his 1914 valuation of the property as slab walled with an iron roof, measuring 54’x12’ (Appendix A). Today, the machinery shed location is marked by a small scatter of metal parts, fragments of the wooden structure, and stone and bricks scattered about. Among the ruins of th these structures are a metal 19 century ships tank, a Figure 5 Glenburn Machinery Shed remains in the rusted bed frame, a metal trough and sheets of flat and foreground with pisé and slab cottages in the corrugated iron. background (ACT Heritage 2014) Figure 6 shows the wooden slab structure in a dilapidated state by 1947 (Photo by Arthur Wilson in 1947 with James Edmonds standing in front of the still standing shed, from McAlister 2007: 15). The shed is supported on a series of large bush pole posts set in a 2x4 pattern, with a lean-to extending the western side of the shed. There are two mature trees in the background which are no longer extant. The date of construction for the shed is unknown, but the 1947 photograph shows that it had a bark roof. The 1913 valuation by Moriarty and the 1915 disposal schedule both describe this building as having a bark roof (McAlister 2007: 21). Figure 6 Glenburn Machinery Shed in 1947 (source Arthur Wilson, from McAlister 2007: 15)
BACKGROUND INFORMATION – GLENBURN PRECINCT – NOVEMBER 2015
Glenburn hayshed site Located 160m to the north-west of the Shearing Complex, near Glenburn Creek, was the hay storage area. The date of construction for the Glenburn hayshed is unknown, but as the hay shed was included in Moriarty’s 1913 valuation as being in good condition, it is likely that the structure was built during the time of John James Edwards. It existed in a good condition as noted in Moriarty’s 1913 valuation, which also notes that it included a skillion (of which there is no longer any evidence) and a chaff cutting and engine room (Appendix A). He also noted that there were associated yards, although there is very little evidence left of them today. The shed was built using four pairs of vertical posts as the main supports. Figure 7 Glenburn Hayshed remaining posts (ACT Heritage 2014) Bulbeck and Boot (1990: 29) suggest that this shed is younger than the Machinery Shed near the Glenburn Homestead based on its condition at the time of their survey. By 2011 there was very little left of the structure and the upright posts were leaning badly, with two having fallen completely. The Friends of Glenburn engaged in conservation works and all the posts have been re-erected and straightened. There is a remnant post and rail fence to the north west of the shed ruin. A field mower is located near the hayshed site, on the same side of an existing fence as the shearing shed.
Excavated areas along Glenburn Creek There are several areas of disturbance along the section of Glenburn Creek between the Glenburn Hayshed site and the Colverwell Graves. There are wide shallow sections of the upper alluvial soil that have been removed along the northern bank, one or two deep pools within the creek and a wide sloping bank near the Woolshed where the creek may have been diverted. It is possible that quarrying or mining activity may have been carried out here in the late nineteenth or early twentieth century (Bulbeck & Boot 1990). While it is possible that some small scale alluvial gold mining occurred along the banks of the rivers in the area, there are no reports of payable deposits being found and it is more likely that the earthworks are sheep washing runs or ponds related to the possible early wool industry, or erosion exacerbated as a result of mining activities. It has also been suggested by McAlister (2007) that the disturbance is a result of quarrying of material for the pise house 250–280m to the northwest.
ACT woolsheds There are over 50 woolsheds recorded in the ACT, of which 42 are still extant (Appendix B, although there are likely more examples that are not recorded in this list as well as many more modern examples). Woolsheds in the ACT fall into four broad categories: • •
Early 19 century – these are the earliest woolsheds that had not yet developed into a type and the surviving examples are highly modified as technology and practice changes over time. Post-1861 Robertson Land Acts – with the division of large pastoral holdings into smaller selections came an influx of smaller woolsheds and the woolshed ‘type’ started to emerge as technology and practice advanced and became well known. Post-1901 Shearers’ Accommodation Act – woolsheds from this period had settled into the type and were purpose designed with machinery-based shearing. Surrounding buildings conform to the new legislation. Post-FCT – as the rural landscape was broken up with the formation of the city the smaller farms had to adapt, often building their own small woolsheds, using sawn timbers and higher quality construction due to the availability of materials and stricter building codes. Within this category is included Soldier Settler woolsheds. 10
BACKGROUND INFORMATION – GLENBURN PRECINCT – NOVEMBER 2015 The earlier examples are less well represented, with post-FCT examples forming the bulk of the known early woolsheds within the ACT. Within the post-FCT woolsheds are the Soldier Settler woolsheds which are an important sub-category which show those properties that were acquired under the Soldier Settlement scheme, few of which are still intact (Navin Officer 2001; and Pfanner 1999). Significance of woolsheds as a general type Woolsheds are a link to Australia’s historic wool industry and the growth of pastoralism. They also demonstrate improvements in farming and wool practices over the past 150 years. As a type of place, they are iconic symbols of the rural way of life that is such an important part of Australia’s historicised identity. It is difficult to separate a woolshed from its landscape, but that is a recurring theme in the ACT as the urban area develops outwards and encroaches upon earlier pastoral holdings. As development gets closer to a woolshed it affects the connection to the landscape and diminishes the integrity of the place. The immediate landscape includes the stock yards, dips and often access to water. The intermediate landscape includes shearers’ quarters and often the homestead as well. The larger landscape covers the holdings associated with the place while the expanded landscape includes the surrounding properties within a topographic boundary that creates a social connection.
Glenburn Woolshed Bulbeck & Boot (1990) suggest that John McInnes built the woolshed at Glenburn in the 1880s, using slab timber and corrugated iron, making it one of the oldest in the ACT, yet McAlister (2007) has provided later research that suggests that the central part of the woolshed may date back into the 1860s. The Figure 8 Glenburn Shearing Complex. Shearers' Quarters are in the foreground earliest section of the shed that and the Woolshed in the background. (ACT Heritage 2014) likely dates from this time is the central rectangular gable-roof structure made from bush poles. It may have been first built as a hayshed with an A-frame roof, and later modified and extended to serve as a shearing shed. Most of the present structure and associated sheep dip and yards are of later construction. The shed is a wood slab building that has been constructed in several phases and has been subject to continual repair and maintenance resulting in a mixture of original and later materials, including adzed and machined timber as well as bush pole piers. Later additions have been made to the shed expanding outwards in all directions. The concrete sheep dip at the shearing shed was built around 1945, replacing an earlier 1920’s dip , located to the south west of Glenburn Homestead where a small tributary joins Glenburn Creek. This earlier sheep dip was built of flagged stones cemented together and the fences around the yards were post and rail. Prior to this, any sheep dipping or washing may have been conducted along the banks of one of the nearby creeks, where channels and pools would have been dug out and lined with wood for the purpose.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION – GLENBURN PRECINCT – NOVEMBER 2015 The shed has four shearing stands with Lister shearing mechanisms, which run off a motor located in a room on the north-eastern side of the building. There are also two electric Sunbeam shearing mechanisms used for smaller jobs such as crutching. As well as the shearing stands, the internal space includes holding pens, wool bays, a table for spreading fleeces, and three wool presses, two of which are of wood the other of metal. Located immediately to the north of the shearing shed was a small pit toilet clad in corrugated iron. The structure post-dates the shearing shed. However, the original toilet pit and structure is no longer evident. In its heyday the shearing shed took up to 10,000 sheep annually (Cross & Sheedy 1978). Local residents of the Kowen area including the descendents of the Colverwells, who had been living in the area around that time; used the shed to shear sheep strengthening the rural community of the area. The shed has st continued to be used into the 21 century. The shearing shed was expanded in sections as needs arose and materials were available. The original gabled section may date as far back as the 1860s, with the extensions probably dating to the 1880s as per Moriarty’s description in his valuation for the place (Appendix A). McAlister also notes that there were Figure 9 Plan showing the internal layout of the Glenburn many changes made to the shed in the 1920s, such as woolshed (Dowling &Cosgrove 2002:34) the sweating shed and the external pit toilet, with the latest addition being the wool room added sometime after 1947. ***The shed and the equipment in it is privately owned and the building is locked to prevent unauthorised access. It should also be noted that the building may not be sound and entering it could be dangerous.***
Glenburn shearers’ quarters The Glenburn Shearers’ Quarters are located ~45m south of the woolshed. McAlister (2007: 9) notes that the shearers’ quarters would have been built shortly after 1956 after Norman and Raymond (dick) McInnes took up the lease for Block 13 (today consisting mostly of Block 72). Previously the shearers were accommodated in the Glenburn Homestead (Dowling & Cosgrove 2002: 35). He goes on to note that the quarters were only used for about a decade and after that only intermittently by the McInnes family. The shearers’ quarters are located 50 yards (~45m) away from the shearing shed – this is the minimum distance of accommodation from a shearing shed required under the Rural Workers Accommodation Ordinance 1938.
Figure 10 Glenburn Shearers' Quarters (ACT Heritage 2013)
The building is of corrugated galvanised iron on a timber frame with a small extension attached to the northern corner. The building consists of six bedrooms, four in the main building and two in the extension, which are all accessed directly from outside, with no internal access. The southern end of the main building has two large rooms which form the communal, kitchen and dining areas. The layout of the accommodation is a direct result of the Rural Workers Accommodation Ordinance 1938 which stated
BACKGROUND INFORMATION – GLENBURN PRECINCT – NOVEMBER 2015 that the living and dining areas must be separate and not joining on to the accommodation which must also be separate from each other. It also notes that a maximum of two people were to be housed in each room, which would allow for a transitory workforce of 12 rural workers (including shearers, rouseabouts, classers etc.). The quarters have been abandoned for several years and are now in a very poor state of repair. Several windows and door locks have been damaged and there is smoke damage to internal walls and ceilings, most likely caused by occasional squatting. It should also be noted that the building may not be sound and entering could be dangerous.
Sheep dip and yards (early 20th century) The sheep dip and yards are located 500m to the west of the woolshed, at the confluence of Glenburn Creek and a th smaller tributary. Built by the early 20 century and improved in 1940, the dip and yards presumably ceased being used after the new dip was built adjacent to the shearing complex c.1945 (McAlister 2007: 23). The sheep dip is dug into the ground and lined with brick that has been rendered. The sheep dip and yards are a good example of the use of local materials to build rural structures that have been sited to take advantage of water sources as well as the higher, rocky ground adjacent to the site to help the sheep dry without creating muddy patches.
Figure 12 Sheep Dip and Yards (early 20th century) detail of the dip ramp (ACT Heritage 2015)
Figure 13 Sheep Dip and Yards (early 20th century) overview looking northwest down to Glenburn Creek (ACT Heritage 2015)
Sheep loading ramp and yard (late 20th century) The sheep yards, built in the 1980s by Ken McInnes, are a continuation of the pastoral use of the place and demonstrate changes in farming practices. They consist largely of recycled materials, demonstrating the resourcefulness that is a hallmark of Australian rural properties. Figure 11 Sheep yard and Loading Ramp (ACT Heritage 2014)
BACKGROUND INFORMATION – GLENBURN PRECINCT – NOVEMBER 2015
Ploughlands There is an area of parallel ridges visible in the northeast paddocks of the Precinct. This 26 hectare (64 acre) area is the result of past cultivation methods and are known as ploughlands. Ploughlands are the result of using draught animals pulling a small hand-controlled plough that the operator would walk behind. The plough was designed to cut through the soil, either with a fixed or rolling disk blade, which would then be turned and pushed to the side by the mould board that followed the cutting edge. The cutting edge and mould board form the plough share. The plough share could be a single unit, or could be combined into multiple shares that could work a larger area with each pass, but required more power (in the form of larger teams of draught animals or, later, mechanical power) to pull. A single share plough required the operator to walk for 13 miles to plough one acre of land, which would take almost an entire day (Sloane & Sloane 1998: 11). The single share plough was most popular amongst small farmers as it was cheaper to buy, did not require the farmer to own large teams of draught animals, and was sufficient for the smaller paddocks that characterised post 1861 Robertson Land Acts properties. The pattern of the dug out furrow and the adjacent built up ridge (or ‘‘land’’) from the thrown soil produces a distinctive pattern that is heavily influenced by the lay of the land (such as crossing steep contours rather than following them, or flowing around creeklines and other obstacles) and the methods employed by the pedestrian plough that are not factors affecting the later, larger scale, mechanical powered plough. The distinctive patterns left by this method of ploughing can be seen on the ground many decades, and sometimes centuries, after they were made. However, they are easily disturbed by modern ploughing, development, and changes in land use. There have been well over 100 ploughlands known to have existed in the ACT, but only 16 of them still contain substantial features, and of these only six (i.e. Glenburn, Old Orroral ploughland and homestead site, Orroral Homestead ploughland, Booroomba/Blytheburn, Well Station #2 and Mulligans Flat #1) were recommended as having significant heritage features (Pearson 2002). Glenburn Creek flows through the area between the Colverwell graveyard and the homestead structures bisecting the area of ploughlands. The area around the Creek is still swampy in areas, but localised drainage would have been th helped by the ploughing. Available satellite imagery suggests that there is almost 26 hectares (65 acres) of 19 century ploughlands in the northern part of the Glenburn Precinct. Within this area there are several different fields and at least two different orientations of ploughing. While there is a large area of land that has evidence of ploughlands, there has been much disturbance and only a part, about 4 hectares (10 acres) of this contains evidence with a good level of intactness. In 1911, F. W. Moriarty’s valuation (Appendix A) of the property noted 55 acres of cleared lands, which corresponds to the ploughlands along the northern edge of the Precinct. Two further valuations were done on the property, one by C.W.B. King, a surveyor and land appraiser from Sydney in 1914, and one by R. Futter in December 1914 (Appendix. A). The pasturage was described as ‘good but rabbits numerous’ and that was suitable for ‘raising sheep’, with a carrying capacity of 2 acres to one sheep, but after effecting improvements, the capacity would be one acre to one sheep. Pearson (2002: 44) notes that the ploughlands in the Glenburn Precinct can be separated into at least two groups as the patterns suggest that two different ploughs have been used at different times in the past. He also notes that the association with other early rural sites in the Precinct and the well preserved rural context of the Precinct make it a th good example of, not just ploughlands, but also 19 century rural life in the region. The description of the area describes, ‘two paddocks showing a clear pattern of ridge and furrow ploughing, running in differing directions due to changing slope. The flat (west) paddock has a furrow-to-furrow width of about 13m for major furrows with minor furrows 4.2m apart. This distinctive pattern may have resulted from the use of a four-share plough, [an example of which is still] located in an adjacent paddock. The flat paddock furrows cross the current fenceline which appear to be shown in the 1915 map, indicating that they predate 1915. The hillside (east) paddock has furrows 7–8m apart, running down slope. The two paddocks are closely associated with other less-well preserved ploughlands, possibly the oldest woolshed in the ACT, the Glenburn pisé and slab homestead (1860s) and the Colverwell Graves (1837).’(p.44)
BACKGROUND INFORMATION – GLENBURN PRECINCT – NOVEMBER 2015
Colverwell graves In 1837 Luke and Mary Colverwell’s first two daughters, Elizabeth and Margaret, aged 6 and 5 years, drowned in a tragic accident in the creek near their home. The two little girls were buried at a site below the house. Their graves are marked by sandstone headstones and footstones which are still legible and were reinstated in a 2005 conservation program. The small graveyard has at least two and possibly five burials associated with it. It is situated on an area of high ground above Glenburn Creek surrounded by grassland in the central region of the valley. The yard is enclosed by a post and rail fence of approximately 8 x 7 metres. The post and rail fence had previously been in an advanced state of deterioration before conservation in 2005, which included the erection of a second, outer fence. There are two carved headstones and two footstones within the graveyard belonging to the two Colverwell children who were accidentally drowned in the creek in 1837. The headstones had fallen from their original upright positions with the gravestones falling carved face uppermost and as a consequence weathering and lichen encrustation caused some deterioration of the inscriptions. The headstones were conserved and cleaned and then re-erected with aluminium supports during the 2005 conservation program. The epitaphs contain several mistakes (Figure 15) and the two headstones are likely carved by different people as evidenced by the different fonts, sizes and spacing used. This is also an indication that the carving was done by amateurs, although it is unlikely that it was done by the Covlerwells given that the surname was misspelt twice on each headstone. A resistivity survey in 1988 identified four areas of differing subsurface resistance: two large areas in the western section and two smaller areas in the vicinity of the fallen gravestones. Historical records identify four individuals as being buried in the graveyard – the two young children Elizabeth and Margaret, a daughter who died twenty years later and possibly Luke Colverwell. Egloff (1988) suggested that the two larger areas of differential resistivity represent adult burials, with the elder daughter in one and the parents, Luke and Mary Colverwell in the other. If this is the Figure 14 Colverwell Graves case then five members of headstone text (from ACT Parks the Colverwell family may and Conservation Service 2015) buried in this small graveyard.
Figure 15 Colverwell Graves (ACT Heritage 2013)
The Colverwell graveyard is believed to contain the oldest marked graves in the ACT (Egloff 1988, Dowling & Cosgrove 2002), the next oldest being that of Ann Powell in the Queanbeyan Riverside Cemetery who died on 2 May 1847 (Cross 1985).
Kowen School There is a long history of private and public schooling in the region that is now the ACT. The first school in the region opened at Palmerville in 1844. The first public school was established at Yarralumla in about 1850. Early education in the ACT region followed the same pattern for much of NSW and Australia in general. The first schools were sectarian and featured religious teachings. There were many efforts to reform the education system, but sectarian influence 15
BACKGROUND INFORMATION – GLENBURN PRECINCT – NOVEMBER 2015 held back any change. It was not until the Public Schools Act of 1866 that schools came under the influence of the government and rules were set up for funding and provision of teachers as well as setting minimum numbers required for full and part-time schools. This, combined with more rural settlement arising from the Robertson Land Acts of 1861, resulted in the establishment of many small rural schools, including the Kowen School in 1875. The number of schools grew over time and there seems to have been a significant expansion in the 1870s as a result of the Public Schools Act of 1866. Seven schools were constructed during this period in the Canberra district. (Gillespie 1991) The first provisional school was called ‘Felled Timber’ and ran for four years from February 1875 to November 1878 under Nan O’Donovan (Hall School Museum 2015). However, because this name was used elsewhere it was changed to ‘Kohan’ (a variant spelling of Kowen) in June 1875 (NSW Government, Education and Communities 2015). There are few details available about the first school, but it seems unlikely that it was the same building as the later school, which had land dedicated for its use well after the first school had closed. It is unknown why the school closed, but it is likely that attendance fell below acceptable levels, at which point the school was closed and O’Donovan was relocated to the Yarralumla School at Bulgar Creek. It was two years before the school was to reopen with the correct name of ‘Kowen’. On 3 May 1881, Fredrick Campbell lodged an application for the establishment of a school at ‘Glenburn near Kowen – Queanbeyan’ to provide education for the number of children living in the area (Hall School Museum 2015). The application resulted in the opening of a provisional school in July 1882 and later that year the school was raised to public status. The residents of Kowen undertook to send their children to the school and provided the building and furniture for it. For instance, the McInnes family were living in Kowen Homestead at the time and were included on the application to establish the Kowen School, listing four children from the family as candidates to attend the school, as nominated by John McInnes, and they resided 3.5km from its proposed location (McAlister 2007: 44). The school provided a much needed local venue for the education of the local children which otherwise would have had to be undertaken at Queanbeyan, at home, or not at all. Those children who attended the school came from the McNerney, Campbell, Gallagher, and McInnes families, totalling fifteen children between them. The public school continued until October 1906 by which time the population had began to decline. Education continued on intermittently for some time, with the school operating in a subsidised capacity in 1908, 1912 and 1913 when it finally closed (Gillespie 1999: 54–55). The exact location of the school site is unknown. As McAlister (2013b) points out, the parish maps’ location of the school is really only indicative. When the historical map is georeferenced and placed over current imagery, it becomes clear that the actual location of the school could cover quite a large area; the indicative building footprint on the map measures roughly 40m x 10m, whereas the old Gungahleen School, a typical sized rural school for the time and region, measured ~7m x 5m (24’x17’) with a 2.6m (8’6’) verandah. McAlister’s (2013b: 2) assertion that it was a modest structure based on a valuation of £35, is likely an accurate description; for comparison the original Gungahleen Schoolhouse was constructed in the mid-1880s for £125. The location would have been in the general area of the crossroads of Charcoal Kiln Road and River Road, but with no physical remains on the ground the exact location remains unsure. The school is said to have been demolished and built over during the Second World War, however with the exact location of the school building unknown and no evidence of the school remains, it is not clear if this was the case. The pine trees that were likely within the school grounds have died and only two of the dead trunks (still standing) remain. The present track, which runs past the site, is part of the former road which ran south from the school and then southwest, crossing the Molonglo River near Collier’s Homestead Ruins and then to the Queanbeyan/Bungendore Road (present Kings Highway).
BACKGROUND INFORMATION – GLENBURN PRECINCT – NOVEMBER 2015
Charcoal kilns During the Second World War the site of the school is said to have been built over with charcoal burning facilities as a part of the war effort, although it is more likely that the remains of the school were demolished coincidentally when the kilns were built. Twelve charcoal kilns were built to assist the war effort in Canberra and reduce the problems caused by petrol rationing. Red and Yellow Box gums were harvested and burnt in the kilns to produce charcoal (McAlister 2007: 22). The charcoal was then used as a petrol substitute mainly for Commonwealth vehicles (Cross 1985: 51). Vehicles were fitted with gas producing units, which were fired by charcoal to produce a gas primarily consisting of hydrogen and Figure 16 Charcoal Kilns remains (ACT Heritage 2014) carbon monoxide. This small, but vital industry wound down after the war when the restrictions on petrol use were eased. The kilns were most likely then dismantled and the bricks used elsewhere. One of the roads in Kowen Forest that runs past the site has been named Charcoal Kiln Road to commemorate the production of charcoal in the area during the Second World War. The remnants of charcoal kilns are situated near the northwest corner of the precinct. Surface remains of nine kilns are still visible as small clusters of blackened bricks and earth. The kilns had a circular concrete base of ~4.5 metres in diameter with a slightly raised border on the rim and were arranged in pairs. The brick walls from the kilns, which would have been built on the raised borders, have been removed (Bulbeck and Boot 1990:26).
Kowen Copper Mine Site Within the boundary for the original Portion 1 (currently Block 72) there is an area containing a spoil heap of blue-grey gravel in the southeast of the Precinct, 500m east of Collier’s Homestead Ruins, noted by Moriarty’s valuation (Appendix A) as a former copper mine. Copper mining is a hard rock process that requires crushing of ore and processing on a large scale, so it is likely that the area is a test pit, or a small sample that was mined to see if it would be worthwhile to establish mining operations proper. While the area may have been in the Gundaroo Goldfields area, it is not too far from the copper/gold/zinc/silver mines at Captains Flat to the south for someone to think it worthy of testing. This appears to be the case as evidenced by the neighbouring Portion Plan 20 (cited in McAlister 2007: 26) which includes a note in 1882 for a mineral lease (minerals other than gold or coal) by JB Thompson Jnr, J J Wright, J Kinsela and JB Thompson Snr which was refused.
Figure 17 Glenburn Copper Mine (ACT Heritage 2014)
BACKGROUND INFORMATION – GLENBURN PRECINCT – NOVEMBER 2015
Collier’s Homestead Ruins Collier’s Homestead Ruins (historical Portion 1, then Block 29, currently Block 94, Kowen) is the ruins of a substantial stone house for the region at the time and is located on a small rise above the Molonglo River at the Southern end of the Precinct. There were three attempts to purchase the land. The first was by Archibald McDonald in 1879, but was refused on the basis that there were sufficient improvements to bar selection, but then George Campbell’s 1880 bid for an improved purchase of his presumptive lease containing the land was also refused as was the bid by the trustees of his estate (Campbell Close and Scroggie) in 1884 (McAlister 2007: 25). Instead, much later, it was bought by John James Edwards in 1909 for £177 8s 6d (Campbell in his 1880 bid suggested a value of £315 for the improvements alone). McAlister (2007: 25–28) cites valuations of the place that describe it as a 36’ square stone cottage with rough internal plastering, iron roof, a bakers oven (visible as a pile of stone rubble abutting the east side of the north wall), two brick chimneys, ‘scrim’ ceilings (a heavy cloth stretched across and often painted over), wood floors, 5’ verandahs on two sides, external kitchen (20x12’ iron-clad and roofed with wood floor and stone fireplace), orchard (described as being th neglected by the early 20 century), and one or two outbuildings of slab and iron (non-extant, one remaining post). The valuation from Moriarty suggests that the place was 50 years old at the time. Currently the place consists of only the partial stone walls, the mostly fallen down bakers oven, and the remnant chimneys of the cottage (no evidence of roofing or flooring) and the remnant of the orchard. There were previously three large pine trees that have since been removed. Colin McAlister’s continuing research into the area has revealed that the Inspector of Conditional Purchases advised the Sales Branch in Sydney in July 1881 that on the date of McDonald’s selection (December 1879), ‘House was on Archibald McDonald’s selection at date of selection. Completed except internal fittings.’ Therefore it is reasonable to assume that Colliers Homestead was built in 1879/80 (McAlister, May 2015 pers. omm..).. McAlister (2007: 30) notes an excavated area 25m to the southeast of Collier’s Homestead Ruins which may be the result of minerals (other than gold or coal) exploration for which there is an application on the portion plan. This may be an attempt at claiming the block under the Robertson Land Acts, one of the options for conditional purchase included spending money on mineral exploration instead of improvements, although this was a more expensive method. Collier lived in Jerrabomberra and his occupation was listed as farming in the 1872 Greville Postal Directory. In 1874, he successfully received the tender at 40 pounds per annum to convey the mail to and from Queanbeyan, Lanyon and Cuppacumbalong three times a week (Queanbeyan Age 15 April 1874: 2.). In 1880, he gave evidence for a criminal matter heard in Queanbeyan. Two young men called Summerville and Luton were charged and found guilty of stealing sheep belonging to Campbell (Queanbeyan Age 1880: 2). In the following year, he pleaded guilty to the charge of refusing to assist a police officer when requested. He was sentenced to be imprisoned until the ‘Rising of the Court’, meaning that he was convicted, but not sent to gaol. Collier is noted as being a Sheppard for the Campbell’s by 1880 and living in the Homestead by 1881, as he agreed for some of his children to attend the school applied for by Frederick Campbell. John James Edmonds moved in after the Colliers probably before the 1891 census in which it is noted he lived at ‘Glenbourne’ and he officially purchased Portion 1 in the same year. (McAlister 2007: 30–31; and McAlister 2013b: 8)
Figure 18 Collier's Homestead Ruins (ACT Heritage 2013)
McAlister (2013b: 8–10) suggests that the Collier family was living in both Colliers Homestead and Curley’s Hut as the family expanded, but had moved out by 1889 when the Edmonds moved in. He goes on to suggest that the Edmonds had moved to Glenburn Homestead by 1897. McAlister (2013a: 7) notes that it was used from the early 18
BACKGROUND INFORMATION – GLENBURN PRECINCT – NOVEMBER 2015 th
20 century as farm storage after the two families had lived there and that by 1913 it had been described as dilapidated. In 2011 the Friends of Glenburn contracted a landscape architect to make an orchard management plan (McAlister 2013a: 8). In 2012 the Friends of Glenburn erected an interpretive sign (McAlister 2013a: 8). McAlister (2013b: 6) notes that in late 2013 the Friends of Glenburn and Parks starting capping of the stone walls and collected and stacked many of the fallen rocks‘’ as well as controlling weeds in the ruins. By 2014 the ruins have had further concrete capping, the internal spaces cleared of most debris, a rabbit-proof fence constructed and some work Figure 19 Curley's Homestead ruins (ACT Heritage done on the orchard by horticulture students from the 2014) Canberra Institute of Technology (CIT) (McAlister 2014: 7)
DESCRIPTION Collier’s Homestead is situated in the southern end of the precinct, adjacent to the lower western slopes of Mount Atkinson, where the valley floor drops down to the Molonglo River. The dwelling is located above the floodline, around 60m from the river, where the river flows to the west into Molonglo Gorge. The building is quite substantial for its time. The walls of the building are made of a roughly coursed mortared stone, some of which have been worked, with some sandstock bricks used around openings and in the chimneys. The stone has been selectively used so that the square, flat and aesthetically pleasing stones form the outer and inner faces with smaller rubble in between. Externally the wall has been finished with a cement lime pointing with scoring to emphasise the joins, otherwise the stone has been left in its natural state. Internally, the walls have been finished off with a lime-render, that EMA (2008:29) note starts ~200mm above the footings, suggesting a 100mm bearer and 100mm joist There are four roughly equal sized small rooms along the southern end of the house. They are ~2x4m each. The room in the southeast corner has no internal access, with its only door backing on to what would have been a verandah. The other three rooms are all accessed internally via a central corridor that bisects the building into the four small southern rooms and two large rooms to the north. The large rooms have a brick fireplace in a shared wall with a shared chimney. The northwest large room measures 4.9x3.8m and has a doorway to the corridor. The northeast room measures 5.5x4.5m and appears to have been a common area with open access to the corridor and one of the small rooms opening into it. EMA (2008: 38) note that stone construction was quite common for the time, and the size was also similar to other Campbell estate buildings (e.g. Blundells, Mugga Mugga, Majura). What they do not note is the quality of the stonemasonry, which is of a significantly higher quality than the rough, unworked random-rubble stone cottages that were common. They also note of the setting that the cleared area of flat land had good water access.European fruit th (and sometimes ornamental/specimen) trees were a common feature of 19 century rural Australia. EMA (2008: 41) notes that, the place is representative of how people lived at the time. The orchard has been described in detail by Demarco (2012). It contains quince, pear, plum, apple, blackberry and hawthorn. • • • • •
Quince – the quince grove entirely consists of sucker plants, with no evidence left of the original plantings that they have descended from. They are in good condition. Pear – the single pear tree is likely to be an original feature, over a century old, and is in excellent condition. Apple – there are two apple trees that are unlikely to be original, but are quite old. Plum – there are several plum trees that have come from seeds or suckers that are in good health, but only one original which is in a poor condition. The blackberry and hawthorn are invasive weeds, which are often removed during maintenance, but have a 19
BACKGROUND INFORMATION – GLENBURN PRECINCT – NOVEMBER 2015 habit of returning.
Curley’s Homestead Curley’s Homestead Ruins is located in historical Block 44 (current Block 16), Kowen. Parish maps indicate that land was owned by the partnership of Charles Campbell, Robert Campbell Close and James Scroggie, who were absentee landowners in Kowen (McAlister 2013b). William Collier conditionally purchased portions 44, 45 and 75 of the Parish of Amungula in June 1882 and it is likely that the house was built between 18821885 to satisfy the conditions of the lease (McAlister 2013b: 4). William Collier was married to Bridget Curley, which may be the source for the name of Curley’s Hut (Cross 1985). Conditional purchases relating to Curley’s Hut indicate that William Alexander Collier purchased Portion 44, consisting of 42 acres, upon which the hut stands, in June 1882. Over several years he also purchased adjoining holdings, Portions 45 (40acres) and 75–80 (80, 48, 40, 40, 130 and 112 acres respectively; a total of 532 acres. In 1882, William Alexander Collier also purchased section 21 of the Parish of Amungula roughly 5km to the northwest of Curley’s hut (Goulburn Penny Post, 3 October 1892: 4). McAlister (2013a 2013b) observes that the land purchased by Collier in the 1880s to be ‘a substantial holding for the locality’. In addition, a valuation report prepared by Inspector Manton in April and May 1887 indicates that at that time Curley’s Hut was a substantial dwelling (McAlister 2013a). The list of improvements made on the property consisted of a slab building with an iron roof with a floor plan of five rooms and the surface had been floored. A detached slab building with a bark roof was also listed as a kitchen (McAlister 2013a). The portion plan for 44, 45, 75–80 (shown in McAlister 2013b: 18) lists fencing improvements in 1884 for portions 76– 78, which includes the sheepyards that can be seen drawn on portion 76; however, there is no mention of the house, although this only shows that it was not built when Collier conditionally purchased portion 44 in 1881, giving the earliest possible date for construction. McAlister’s (2013b) assertion that construction occurred in 1882/1883 in order to fulfil the terms of the conditional purchase seems likely. His date for the last known occupation is also a sensible suggestion of at least 1887 when the inspector of conditional purchases noted that the selector was using the place as his home. McAlister (2013b: 12) suggests that the Collier family were living in the stone cottage across the creek, Collier’s Homestead, but had also spread across to Curley’s Hut to more comfortably accommodate their 14 children. Other records presented by McAlister (2013a) have confirmed Cross’ assertion that the Collier family did not live in Kowen for long. William Collier and his family were recorded as occupying Curley’s Homestead until he sold all his holdings in July 1887 (McAlister 2013a). McAlister (2013b: 5) argues that the Colliers had moved out of Curley’s Hut by 1890 as none of the Collier children had been registered to be sent to the Kowen school that year. The argument is strengthened by the 1891 census which list William Collier and family as living in Queanbeyan. McAlister (2013b: 5) conjectures that this may have been a result of work drying up in the area with the Campbell estate selling off holdings in the area in 1886; both events, the Campbell estate and then Collier selling land, were probably heavily influenced by a major drought that assailed NSW in the mid- to late- 1880s and had a significant impact on the economy (ABS 1988). McAlister (2007: 41 and 2013b: 5) has conjectured if other people had lived at Curley’s hut after the Colliers moved out, but the evidence is not strong. It is clear that by Moriarty’s 1913 valuation the place had been abandoned and was in a very poor state (McAlister 2013b: 5). By 1913, a valuation, carried out by Flutter, indicated that the main cottage was in a derelict state (McAlister 2013a). The site was described in Bulbeck and Boot (1990) as brick fragments and stone within a small mound of masonry rubble. There is a line of in-situ flag stones covering ~6m on the southern edge of the mound and two squared off stones probably mark a doorstep. They suggest it would have been about ten metres square. In 2008 Eric Martin and Associates (EMA 2008: 35) noted that, ‘there appears no visible evidence of the cottage but it may be concealed by blackberries. There is evidence of a flattened area of land which may have been a structure’. Following poisoning of the blackberries by Parks and Conservation staff, the Friends of Glenburn cleared the area in 2013, revealing the remains of the cottage once again (McAlister 2013b: 4). What they revealed closely follows the Bulbeck and Boot description, but also revealed a post stump and possible small outbuildings as well.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION – GLENBURN PRECINCT – NOVEMBER 2015
DESCRIPTION The remains of Curley’s Hut are located ~100m northwest of Collier’s across the former road, now an ephemeral tributary to the Molonglo River. The ruins tend to become obscured by weeds, but when cleared the extent of the site becomes clear. There is a large, low mound of stone rubble where the chimney has fallen down, with some coursing evident in the central area. There are two large stones which presumably formed steps to the front door on what would have been the southern facade. There is a wooden post stump in-situ southwest of the rubble pile. A few metres to the south of the rubble pile is a small collection of stone which may represent the extents of the non-extant building, or possible another small feature. East of the rubble, across a modern fence, is a small depression which may have been an associated feature, such as a well or pit toilet. There is a small orchard of plums 30m to the southwest of the rubble pile. Curley’s orchard has been described in detail by DeMarco (2012). The orchard is located to the south of the house site, near the modern fenceline. It contains a single original plum tree and several suckers surrounding it.
Coppin’s Homestead Ruins At the age of 17, John Coppin, previously a farm labourer in Kent, was lured by the gold rush and immigrated to Australia (Fletcher 1993: 32; Boxall 2013: 2–3). Not long after arriving, he married Catherine Sheedy, who had migrated to Australia just two years earlier from Ballina, Ireland (Shumack 1967: 62; Boxall 2013: 1). After their marriage, John and Catherine relocated to the goldfield at Major’s Creek for several months, supporting themselves with ‘harvesting activities’ (Shumack 19967: 62). As income from the diggings was unreliable, John was advised by a family acquaintance of the Sheedy family, John Patrick Cunningham, to find stable work at a station. John suggested that they travel with him to his place of work, Ginninderra Station (Shumack 1967: 72). In 1859, Coppin arrived at Ginninderra Station, where John accepted a position as a farm hand and shepherd (Shumack 1967: 62). In early 1860, John began working as a shepherd at Goat Gully Station, situated on the southern banks of the Molonglo River, today known as Coppin’s Crossing (Shumack 1967: 62; 72). John attempted to purchase several blocks of land after the 1861 Robertson Acts were introduced but was unsuccessful; Shumack (1967: 139) later claimed that John, like many others, was cheated out of blocks of land through corruption. However, in August 1878, John Coppin finally conditionally purchased Portion 107, comprising 200 acres, located on the southern bank of the Lower Molonglo River.
Figure 20 Coppin’s Homestead ruin (ACT Heritage th 2013) On 25 September 1890, Coppin made an application to purchase 320 acres, Portions 130 and 46 (CP90.153) in the Parish of Amungula. These holdings were located between Glenburn Creek and Burbong where the Colverwell’s also farmed (Bulbeck and Boot 1990: 31). Subsequently, he made another application for the conditional lease for Portion 131, comprising 960 acres. These portions were located on the northern banks of the Molonglo River. The reasons behind his decision to leave Yarralumla are unclear (Boxdall 2013: 15). The Friends of Glenburn cleared the area of blackberry in 2012–13 and erected an interpretive sign.
DESCRIPTION The place is north of the Upper Molonglo River at Burbong within Kowen Forest and it is accessed and located near to a fire trail off River Road. It comprises two standing fireplaces and earthworks that represent the remains of buildings. The fireplaces consist of roughly coursed random rubble cemented with a mud mortar. The first fireplace is located in the northern section of the site and stands 1.5m in height. It was situated along the northern end of a structure. Bulbeck and Boot (1990: 38) interpreted this as a kitchen. 21
BACKGROUND INFORMATION – GLENBURN PRECINCT – NOVEMBER 2015 The other building was perpendicular to kitchen, oriented southeast to northwest. Mounds, the remains of stone walls, indicate that the building was quite large and oriented southeast to northwest. Along the eastern side of the building was a fireplace. Another, smaller, structure was identified as low mounds that have two or three levels of quoins (corner stones) observable. Bulbeck and Boot (1990) also note two depressions nearby that they suggest could be the remains of a well and a privy. Approximately 30m to the southeast of the house is a mature male Osage orange tree (Maclura pomifera). Adjacent to the drainage line to the east of the site are possible man-made drainage channels and ponds, tapping into a small spring. These have been so badly disturbed by forestry activity that it is not clear if this is a historical feature associated with Coppin’s Homestead Ruins. In 2012, ACT Parks with the volunteer group, Friends of Glenburn, cleared the site which was covered in blackberries (Boxdall 2013: 26). Artefact scatters, comprising pottery fragments and a metal washing tub were observed on the ground surface. Conservation works are still needed to stabilise the fireplaces, particularly the southern, taller structure which is poorly consolidated and leaning badly. In 2015 further site work was done, including removal of vegetation and the erection of a fence.
Argyle Homestead Ruins The Argyle Homestead Ruins are located on the northern side of Colverwell’s Boundary Road near the ford across the Molonglo River leading to River Road and John Coppin’s Homestead Ruins. It is outside of the pine plantation area due to its proximity to the river, which has aided in its preservation. The only remains of the Argyle Homestead Ruins are the corner of a fireplace made from roughly dressed and coursed stone. Bulbeck and Boot (1990: 36) note that there were several depressions marking out post holes, indicating that the building was wood and measured roughly 11.5m x 6m. McAlister (2007: 34) argues that it was built by Luke Covlerwell Jnr sometime after 1891 as there was no mention of the house in the census of that year so it must post-date Colverwell’s purchase of the land.
Figure 21 Argyle Homestead Ruins (ACT Heritage 2014)
While there is very little evidence left of the Argyle Homestead, it contributes to the cultural landscape by demonstrating the clustering of dwellings around natural features, the river, while maintaining social connections by building near other settlers and infrastructure (i.e. the road and ford). Additionally, the site should contain archaeological material that is of interest to academic research
Atkinson Trigonometrical Station The following text has been adapted from the Palmer Trigonometrical Station Heritage Register entry with additional information provided by Jeffrey Brown, ACT Surveyor General. The Atkinson Trigonometrical Station (Atkinson Trig – Figure 22) was one of a number of surveying points which th formed a network across New South Wales during the 19 century. This system of survey was important to the early surveyors as reference points from which further measurements were taken to produce maps and to define the location of property boundaries. Atkinson Trig was used as a reference point in the establishment of land boundaries in the parish of Amungula, county of Murray; although it’s placement may have been influenced by the presence of an 22
BACKGROUND INFORMATION – GLENBURN PRECINCT – NOVEMBER 2015 existing trig point dating to the early 1850s when topographic mapping was being done in the region. Atkinson Trig is a stone cairn of truncated conical form, approximately 2.5 metres in diameter at the base and ~1.7 metres in height. The stones are semi-angular blocks of local rock placed without mortar. A roughhewn wooden pole acts as a mast that previously supported a circular set of vanes constructed from galvanised iron, which now lie on the ground at the base of the cairn. The cairn sits atop a primary survey mark and the pole and vanes sits atop of this mark. The mark itself is rarely accessed, instead the vanes are used for sighting towards the Trig or one of the nearby recovery marks (one or more survey marks that are offset from the Trig station) are used to set up equipment directly. The types of equipment used in conjunction with the Trig station has varied over time from compass and chains, to optical theodolites, to total stations, right up to advanced GPS systems that have been used to prepare the ACT for the GDA2020 datum adjustment. Throughout all of these advances in technology, with increasing complexity and accuracy, the same survey mark for the Trig station remains and the equipment works off the same point of reference. Figure 22 Atkinson Trigonometrical Station facing east. (ACT Surveying is the science of large scale, Heritage, 2015) accurate measurement of the Earth’s surface based on applied geometry. Surveying is used in the determination of existing relative horizontal and vertical position such as that used for the process of mapping, and the establishment of marks to control construction or to indicate boundaries. Land surveying in Australia began soon after European settlement. By 1828 most of the settled areas of New South Wales had been mapped as the nineteen provisional counties. Outside these boundaries land was termed “beyond the limits of settlement.” In the Canberra region the Murrumbidgee River marked the western limits of official settlement. The limitation was imposed by the colonial government largely to allow the Surveyor General’s Department under Thomas Mitchell to keep up with the arduous work of land surveying. Surveyor Robert Dixon was one of the first surveyors to work in the Canberra area. In 1829, he wrote to Mitchell from the Limestone Plains referring to the inconveniences of receiving rations and transmitting dispatches to Sydney from such an isolated place. In May 1829, one of his men was tracing the course of Majura Creek above the Limestone Plains and Dixon had set up trigonometrical stations enabling him to extend his surveys further to the west and northwest. By June 1829, Dixon had traced the Murrumbidgee River north of Mt. Corree and had arrived at the Yass Plains. Another of his assistants, Docker, had traced Ginninderra Creek to its source. Surveying in the far counties was often difficult with the surveyors suffering quite severe physical deprivations. They spent many months in the countryside, living in tents at base camps and often during survey transects, living a solitary existence. A ‘piling party’ would work ahead of the surveyor collecting stones and erecting the cairn and pole over the survey mark established in the ground. The stone cairn of Atkinson Trig is typical of these early trig point sites. The 23
BACKGROUND INFORMATION – GLENBURN PRECINCT – NOVEMBER 2015 surveyors and their assistants experienced the range of the country’s weather and temperature conditions. In a letter to his superior, Dixon wrote that his men surveying in the Canberra area `... are now barefooted and ragged and the weather is very cold hard frosts and the western mountains covered with snow’. He asked for ‘slops’ (clothing) and shoes for both his assistants and his convict aids. Other surveyors were to follow on from the initial work done by Dixon. These included Robert Hoddle who came to the Limestone Plains in May 1832 and surveyed the land grants of Campbell, Palmer, Moore and others. In 1878 Edward H. Taylor was surveying in the Parish of Ginninderra followed in 1880-81 by Staff Surveyor Smith from Queanbeyan. Perhaps the most well known surveyor of the Canberra District was Charles Scrivener who commenced work on the boundaries of the new ‘Federal Territory’ when he established a base camp on Kurrajong Hill (now Capital Hill) in January 1910. Scrivener and his surveyors suffered much the same physical hardships as their predecessors and found ‘this work very tedious because of the indifferent character of the old surveys’ particularly along the northwest borders of the ACT. th
In the latter half of the 19 century, when the Atkinson Trig was erected and would have been most intensively used, the rural lands were being surveyed as a response to the changing legislation introduced by John Robertson, Minister for Lands, regarding land ownership and tenure. The Crown Lands Alienation Act 1861 and the Crown Lands Occupation Act 1861, collectively known as the Robertson Land Acts, allowed crown lands, whether held under licence by squatters or not, to be purchased without auction. The Acts encouraged closer settlement by introducing the principles of free selection and conditional purchase after a period of occupancy. One of the major elements in the NSW legislation was that land could be selected before it was surveyed which meant selectors could go almost anywhere and stake a claim to the land. Selectors scrambled for the land and the squatters responded by buying up the prime parts of their runs through dummies or by ‘peacocking’ the best land. Official surveying of the land selections was to follow and it was during this period that the Atkinson Trig was used to increase the accuracy of surveying the smaller landholdings. SITE PLAN
Figure 23 Glenburn Precinct 24
BACKGROUND INFORMATION – GLENBURN PRECINCT – NOVEMBER 2015 REFERENCES Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). 1988. Year Book Australia. No. 71, 1988. The Bureau, Canberra Baker, D. W. A. (1967) The origins of Robertson’s Land Acts. In Eastwood, J. J. And Smith, F. B. Historical Studies: selected articles. 1st series. Melbourne University Press, Victoria. pp103–126. Boxdall, R. 2013. Coppins Crossing and Beyond. The Life and Times of John and Catherine Coppin. Unpublished manuscript. Bulbeck, D. & Boot, P. 1990. Kowen district cultural resource survey and conservation plan: final report. The Heritage Unit and ACT Forests. Commonwealth Bureau of Census and Statistics (CBCS). 1911. Official year book of the Commonwealth of Australia No. 2. Commonwealth Bureau of Census and Statistics, Melbourne, Vic. Cosgrove, C. & Dowling, P. 2002. Glenburn (Kowen) Conservation Management Plan. National Trust of Australia (ACT), Canberra. Cross, R. L. 1985. Bygone Queanbeyan (Rev. ed). Queanbeyan Publishing Co, Queanbeyan, N.S.W. Cross, R.L and B. Sheedy 1983. Queanbeyan Pioneers- First Study: pocket biographies of 112 Pioneers. Brief histories of the Oaks, Oaks Estates, Pound Hill, Dodsworth and Irishtown. Queanbeyan: Queanbeyan books and Prints. Cross, R.L. & Sheedy, P.B. 1978. Kowen – A Brief History of its Sites and Occupants, (includes Kowen; Parish of Amungula – County of Murray, ACT, by E. Lea-Scarlett, R.L. Cross and P. B. Sheedy, 7.3.1978) Damian De Marco and Associates Landscape Architects. 2012. Management Plan for Collier’s and Curley’s Orchards. Prepared for the Friends of Glenburn. Dowling, P. & Cosgrove, C. 2002. Glenburn (Kowen) Conservation and Management Plan. National Trust of Australia (ACT). Egloff, B. J. 1988. Conservation of the Colverwell Graves Kowen Forest, ACT. ANUTEC report for the ACT Heritage Unit. Eric Martin & Associates [EMA]. 2008. William Collier’s Stone Cottage (Kowen). Conservation Management Plan. Report prepared for the National Trust of Australia (ACT). Fletcher, E 1993. Biographical Register of the ‘Australian Capital Territory 1820–1911. Fyshwick, The Heraldry and Genealogy Society of Canberra. Folger, M.1998. McInnes Family of Gilbert and Mary Part 2: Our Folk. Published by the author, Canberra. Gillespie, L. L. 1991. Canberra 1820 – 1913. AGPS Canberra. Gillespie, L. L. 1999. Early Education and Schools in the Canberra Region: a history of early education in the region. Published by the author, Canberra. Hall School Museum (2015) Kowen School [1875 – 1913]. http://museum.hall.act.au/school/2878/kowen-school.html last accessed 25 May 2015. Hobbs, R. 1993. The ACT Pastoral Heritage: Woolsheds and their Contribution to a Cultural Landscape. National Centre for Cultural Heritage Science Studies, University of Canberra. ICOMOS (Australia). 1999. The Burra Charter. The Australia ICOMOS Charter for Places of Cultural Significance. Koch, H. 2009 The Methodology of reconstructing indigenous placenames in the Australian Capital Territory and south-eastern New South Wales. In L.A. Hercus and H.Koch, Aboriginal Placenames. Naming and re-naming the Australian Landscape. Canberra: ANU E Press, :115–174. 25
BACKGROUND INFORMATION – GLENBURN PRECINCT – NOVEMBER 2015 Lewis, M. 2000. Making Do. Patrick Troy (Ed) A History of European Housing in Australia. Cambridge: University of Cambridge: 41–56. Marshall, D., Blair, S. Lance, B., Butler, G. Pearson, M., Phillips, M., Navin Officer Heritage Consultants, and Sharwood, C. 2014. Yarralumla Woolshed Conservation Management Plan. Draft 3. ACT Property Group – Territory and Municipal Services Directorate. McAlister, C 2005, ‘Colverwell Graves: The Case for Urgent Action, in Canberra Historical Journal, New Series No. 55, March 2005 McAlister, C. 2007. Twelve historic sites in the Glenburn and Burbong areas of the Kowen Forest. ACT. Canberra. www.npaact.org.au McAlister, C 2011. The Kowen Plateau: Protection and Conservation in the Glenburn/Burbong Historic Precinct. A paper prepared for the ACT Symposium 2011, 23rd July 2011. McAlister, C 2013a. September 2013 Newsletter. Friends of Glenburn Newsletter. McAlister, C. 2013b. The Glenburn and Burbong historic precinct in the Kowen Forest, ACT: More recent information about some of the Sites and the People. www.npaact.org.au McAlister, 17 May 2015 pers. comm. email to ACT Heritage. Mornement, A. and Holloway, S. 2007. Corrugated Iron: building on the frontier. Frances Lincoln Limited, London. Navin Officer Heritage Consultants (NOHC). 2001. Calum Brae: a comparative assessment of the cultural heritage values of surviving soldier settlement properties within the ACT. Report to Purdon Associates. NCDC 1988. Sites of Significance in the ACT, Vol. 5, Majura, Kowen and Associated Areas. NCDC, Canberra. NSW Governement, Education and Communities (2015) Government Schools of NSW from 1848: Kowen http://www.governmentschools.det.nsw.edu.au/main_pages/school_details.aspx?schoolID=4494 last accessed 25 May 2015. Old Baileys Proceedings 1810. Trial of HENRY CROSSWELL, LUKE CULVERWELL (t181001031–45). Accessed via www.oldbaileyonline.org, 25 September 2013. Pearson, M. 2002. Context Study of ACT Rural Complexes. Heritage Management Consultants unpublished report for the Heritage Unit, Environment ACT. Pfanner, S. 1996. Soldier settlement subdivision in the Federal Capital Territory after World War 1. Canberra Historical Journal No. 37: 25–34. Roberts. L. 2010. The Glenburn complex....restoration and beyond. NPA Bulletin December 2010: 5. Schumack, J.E 1967. An Autobiography, or Tales and Legends of Canberra Pioneers. Edited by L. Fitzhardinge. ANU Press, Canberra. Sloane, A. & Sloane, A. 1998. Heritage Farming in Australia: the Sloane family: changes and challenges, 1860 – 1945. Self published, Yarrawonga, Vic. Sowden, H. 1972. Australian Woolsheds. Cassell Australia, North Melbourne, Vic. Stuart, I. 2007 The surveyors’ lot: making landscapes in New South Wales. Australasian Historical Archaeology 25. Australasian Society for Historical Archaeology, Sydney. Walker, M. 1978, Pioneer Crafts of Early Australia. Melbourne: The Macmillan Company of Australia Pty Ltd. Waterhouse, R. 2006. Agrarian ideals and pastoral realities: the use and misuse of land in rural Australia. In Crotty, M. 26
BACKGROUND INFORMATION – GLENBURN PRECINCT – NOVEMBER 2015 And Roberts, D. A. Eds. The Great Mistakes of Australian History. University of NSW Press, NSW. pp64–78. Williams, D. 2008. Historical Archaeological Salvage at Headquarters Joint Operations Command, between Queanbeyan and Bungendore, NSW. Volume 1, Main Report. Report to Praeco Pty Ltd.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION – GLENBURN PRECINCT – NOVEMBER 2015 APPENDIX A: Evaluations made for Glenburn 1913 – 1915 as cited in Dowling & Cosgrove, 2002:11–12 Notes from Australian Archives record A358(A358/2)/62. When completed the three valuations were compared, with the following results: Value by Mr CWB King Value by Mr Moriarty
£ 6002.13.7 £ 4317.14.9
Value by Mr Futter
Government files recorded in January 1915 note that the property was not yet to be acquired and that, should the land be acquired, Mr Moriarty’s valuation be made the basis of settlement Moriarty’s description of the place was as follows: House Position Condition Dimensions Value (No date of erection) Kitchen Garden fence Condition Dams Condition
4 rooms: Pisé walls rough casted, 2 rooms pine ceiled, 2 rooms hessian ceiled, wood floor, brick chimney, iron roof, 5 [foot] verandah 20 [foot] long, iron roof, wood floor Near NW corner Portion 1 Bad crack on E. wall 28 [foot] X 21 [foot] X 13 [foot](mean height) £ 150 Slab walls, brick chimney, wood floor, iron roof W’board skillion, iron roof, unlined and unfloored Slab “ “ “ “ Low paling fence Position: In front of house Fair Two ‘Tank and bank’ Position: NE corner Portion 1 One good condition One silted, bank burrowed into
A Notice of Acquisition was placed in Gazette No. 21 of 18 March 1915. On 17 May 1915 a (handwritten) Disposal Report was made on Block No. 14, Kowen Section, Part Holding 62, by Mr Surveyor Reid (AA, A361 DSG 23/1408). This was the block that included the Glenburn homestead and the shearing shed. The Report gave the following details: Property Area Occupation Buildings etc.
J.J. Edmonds [crossed out] Woolshed paddock [crossed out] Glenburn Coppermine [inserted] 764 acres Parish Amungula Block No. 0 McInnes Bros. Pisé work house – 4 rooms Detached kitchen and shed room Iron roof Occupied by married cple. & 3 children Slab stables & workshop - bark roof 28
BACKGROUND INFORMATION – GLENBURN PRECINCT – NOVEMBER 2015
Woolshed – Iron roof slab walls 4 machines Hayshed (20 tons stack) 55 acres cleared 40 acres being under crop
The pasturage was described as ‘Good but rabbits numerous’. It was suitable for ‘raising sheep’, with a carrying capacity of 2 acres to one sheep; after effecting improvements, the capacity would be one acre to one sheep.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION – GLENBURN PRECINCT – NOVEMBER 2015 APPENDIX B: ACT woolsheds information from Hobbs (1993) updated by ACT Heritage (2014) Name
18 stands 38k–51k
Early 19th century
Not used since 1911. Queanbeyan Age (20 Nov 1908) notes that 80k–85k sheep were shorn annually in its heyday, with 18 stands in 1908. Burnt down 1980s and totally rebuilt 1990 – still an active sheep station. Abstract in Hobbs, R. (1993).
3 stands 6k– 8k
6 Stands 12k–17k
Location correct, woolshed structure not identified – probably destroyed by fire. Destroyed 1952.
2 stands 4k– 6k unknown
Post-1861 Robertson Land Acts Post-1861 Robertson Land Acts Destroyed
Replaced an earlier shed. Abstract in Hobbs, R. (1993). Reduced to 5 stands in 1920s (10k–15k sheep/year). Suggested as 19th century, but evidence is not clear – probably replaced. n/a
12 stands 25k–34k
Dove Cottage Woolshed Naas Valley
19th Century c.1900
Shearers' quarters post 1915.
Not used since 1964.
20 Stands 42k–56k
Hobbs (1993) notes 50k
Original burnt down in 1905 and rebuilt nearby. Unknown when new shed was demolished, but presumably to make way for CSIRO buildings. n/a
Rebuilt after 1955 fire. Abstract in Hobbs, R. (1993). Abstract in Hobbs, R. (1993). Reduced to 4 stands in 1953 (8.5k–11K sheep/year).
3 stands 6k– 8k 6 Stands 12k–17k
Registered. Burnt in 2003 fires.
2 stands 4k– 6k
3 stands 6k– 8k
Destroyed Post-1861 Robertson Land Acts date not clear Post-1861 Robertson Land Acts Post-1861 Robertson Land Acts Post-1861 Robertson Land Acts Post-1901 Shearers' Accom. Act Destroyed
Post-1901 Shearers' Accom. Act Destroyed Post-1901 Shearers' Accom. Act Destroyed
BACKGROUND INFORMATION – GLENBURN PRECINCT – NOVEMBER 2015 Name
On ACT Heritage Register.
Abstract in Hobbs, R. (1993) – structure in ruins, little of any other features visible. n/a
2 stands 4k6k unknown
Soldier Settler Destroyed
Majura House Woolshed The Old Place
1920s– 30s 1929
1929– 30 1930s
Nominated to ACT Heritage Register, but shed demolished early 1990s. Soldier Settlement. Abstract in Hobbs, R. (1993).
4 stands 8.5k–11K 2–3 stands 4k–8k post-1952 50K+ 3 stands 6k– 8k unknown
Abstract in Hobbs, R. (1993). Destroyed in 2003 fires. 1929 shed originally 2 stands (4K–6K sheep /year) later expanded to 3 (6K–8K sheep/year). Second shed added in 1952, likely expanding capacity to over 50K. n/a
Now a community centre.
Rejected from Register (SoR). On RNE.
2 stands 4k– 6k 4 stands 8.5k–11K unknown
3 stands 6k– 8k
Abstract in Hobbs, R. (1993). 2014 minimal evidence remains – some yards and some footings of associated buildings. n/a
1890s shed relocated.
3 stands 6k– 8k unknown
Exact location not clear.
Abstract in Hobbs, R. (1993).
Abstract in Hobbs, R. (1993).
There may have been an earlier woolshed in the 1830s, but evidence is not clear on the ground. n/a
4 stands 8.5k–11K 3 stands 6k– 8k 2 stands 4k– 6k 6 Stands 12k–17k
Probably destroyed by fire, reduced to one stand at some stage.
Soldier Settler Post-FCT Post-FCT
3 stands 6k– 8k
BACKGROUND INFORMATION – GLENBURN PRECINCT – NOVEMBER 2015 Name
Curran Woolshed / Mulligan's Flat Huntly
Noted by Saunders (1992).
Abstract in Hobbs, R. (1993). National Trust's Heritage in Trust August 2011 notes that they took the bulk of their sheep to Yarralumla until 1961. Abstract in Hobbs, R. (1993).
2 stands 4k– 6k unknown
Exact location unknown. Nominated to ACT Heritage Register. Belconnen Station was subdivided in 1924, one of the subdivisions was Pine Ridge. A weatherboard house was built in 1927/8. Pine Ridge was subdivided into 3 blocks in 2000. Abstract in Hobbs, R. (1993).
3 stands 6k– 8k unknown
3 stands 6k– 8k unknown
A relocated earlier shed.
Luton's Crutching Shed
A small shed in Namadgi for crutching in the field, but shearing conducted elsewhere. n/a
2 stands 4k– 6k unknown
2 stands 4k– 6k
BACKGROUND INFORMATION – GLENBURN PRECINCT – NOVEMBER 2015