Memorandum by Fairbridge
CHILD MIGRANTS (CM106)
FAIRBRIDGE
HistoryIn 1909 Kingsley
Fairbridge set up the Child Emigration Society with the intent
of providing disadvantaged children from inner cities in the UK
with education and training, specifically in farming, in the colonies
and primarily in Australia. He wanted the children to have the
freedom of the land not available to them in this country. He
set up his first farm school in 1912 in Pinjarra. Western Australia
which he and his wife, Ruby, ran; the first children arrived in
1913.From the shipping manifest records held by Fairbridge, the
figures for child migrants between 1913-1960s are as follows:
| Pinjarra Farm School, Western Australia
| 2,515 |
| Molong Farm School, NSW | 929 (includes children and parents)
|
| Adelaide, Victoria | 120 |
| Tasmania | 193 |
| Total | 3,362 |
| Canada, Vancouver | 374 |
These figures include parents who either accompanied or followed
their children to Australia after the introduction of the Parent
Migration Scheme in the late 1950s. However the total figure of
children and parents involved in the Fairbridge scheme is probably
closer to 6,000. This is the figure quoted by Professor Sherington
of the University of Sydney in his paper on Kingsley Fairbridge
and the funding of child emigration (1993). There are 3,700 case
files at the University of Liverpool, but they do not represent
individuals as the case files include siblings as well as parents
who emigrated. Indeed it was not unusual for family groups to
have seven and more children.Children were referred from a number
of agencies. They include the NSPCC; Lambeth Board of Governors;
Middlemore Migration Home, Birmingham; Church of England Waifs
and Strays Society; Sisters of the Church, London NW6; Public
Assistance Authorities, Cardiff and London; Dr Barnardo's; Northcote
Trust; Board of Guardians, Norfolk. These migration schemes were
enthusiastically endorsed by HM Government.The Children Act 1948
virtually placed the responsibility of looking after deprived
children with local authorities. They did not always agree that
emigration was in the best interests of their wards.In the late
1950s Fairbridge introduced a new policy of family migration.
However, child migration did not end at this stage but was phased
out over the next few years. Unaccompanied children continued
to be sent to Australia up until the mid 1960s.Records are available
at the University of Liverpool on the funding, costs and expenditure
involved in administering the scheme. A clear account of some
aspects of funding is provided in the introductory chapter of
"Good British Stock: Child Migration from Britain to Australia
after World War II", a thesis written by Laura Williams as
part of her BA Hons degree (University of Tasmania). Funds were
also raised by private subscriptions organised by local committees
throughout the UK as well as state subsidies.Where possible and
practicable, Fairbridge did try to keep children in touch with
their parents. However, in many cases the children had spent much
of their lives in institutions before emigrating to Australia
and links with their parents had been lost. In many other cases
it may be assumed that, in the circumstances prevailing, the parents
did not wish to keep in touch with their children for a variety
of reasons.With regard to requests for re-unification, whether
from parents or child migrants, these were rare. However, when
they did occur careful thought was given to the background and
reasons for the request. The decision whether to assist or not
was taken having regard to the perceived best interests of the
child at the time. In recent years efforts made by members of
Fairbridge's staff in London have centred on providing information
from records where available.With regard to counselling and other
services, decisions as to the suitability of a child for inclusion
in the Fairbridge scheme were taken in the light of the standards
and perceptions relating to child care then prevailing having
regard to the physical and moral well being of the child at the
time. Latterly Fairbridge has not had the resources or structure
to provide counselling or other services to former child migrants.
Fairbridge substantially revised its objectives in 1982 with the
consent of the Charity Commission and has thereafter worked with
young persons at risk in inner cities throughout the UK. The issue
of counselling was not raised at the time of Fairbridge's re-structuring
but only much later in the 1980s by which time Fairbridge's resources
had been re-deployed.Fairbridge is now reliant upon other agencies
skilled in such practices and is working closely with other "sending
agencies" to facilitate counselling where it is requested.
It is realised that this is not always regarded as necessary by
child migrants, although, after having discovered parts of their
background the trauma often becomes more evident.There have been
cases where Fairbridge has received complaints from Old Fairbridgians
and has tried where possible to address these complaints by supplying
or seeking to facilitate access to information relevant to the
complainant.Records for those people who emigrated under the child
migration schemes through Fairbridge are kept in the Archives
Department of the University of Liverpool. The records form part
of the historical archives relating to Commonwealth emigration.
Access to the records is governed by an agreement reached between
Fairbridge and the University. It is based on the agreement made
between Dr Barnardo's and the University in 1982. Lady Dodds-Parker,
former Chairman of Fairbridge, also entered in correspondence
with Dr Barnardo's, the University of Liverpool's archivist, the
Provincial Archivist of British Columbia Archives and Record Service,
the Fairbridge Foundation in Sydney, NSW and the Fairbridge Society
(WA) in Perth, Western Australia, to determine the precise level
of access available to researchers, relatives of Old Fairbridgians
and Old Fairbridgians. Personal files are only available to former
child migrants. However, the personal files remain the property
of Fairbridge. For this reason, the request by one former Old
Fairbridgian that his file be destroyed was turned down. Old Fairbridgians
are not asked to sign any documentation before they receive assistance
from Fairbridge re their personal records. There is no charge
with regard to the services provided by Fairbridge. Fairbridge
contributes £350 pa to the University of Liverpool to cover
their administration costs.From records held at by Fairbridge's
Central Office, at least 96 child migrants have requested information
since 1991. It is not clear how many other former child migrants
have requested information prior to 1991. However, from a reading
of the files to hand the response to enquires has been open, straightforward,
helpful and prompt. By comparison with Barnardo's which receives
approximately 150 requests for information per month, Fairbridge
receives a very small number of enquiries. This is not surprising
in view of the relatively small number of children under Fairbridge's
care, and given the fact that Fairbridge's child migration policy
effectively ended 30 years ago.Records for the Pinjarra Farm School
are held at the Battye Library, Perth. Those for Molong in the
Sydney Library. Those for Canada in the University of British
Columbia Archives Department. Other records relevant to child
migration prior to leaving the UK held by Fairbridge are in the
Archives Department, University of Liverpool.
HOW LIVES
HAVE BEEN
AFFECTEDMany Old Fairbridgians
have expressed their gratitude for what Fairbridge has given them.
For many the organisation is their family. However, there are
those for whom the experience has been difficult, and, latterly,
traumatic. One Old Fairbridgian, now residing in this country,
is extremely bitter about his treatment. It has recently come
to light that he lost his personal possessions in a burglary in
1942 which included letters from his mother and brother and wishes
Fairbridge to do something about it now. He is seeking compensation
for loss of his "Trust" fund, which was spent on his
behalf by Fairbridge. He is unhappy because he has rediscovered
his sister but his brother in law will have nothing to do with
him. He places the blame on Fairbridge and the National Children's
Homes, Church of England Society and the Government.Another complainant
has recently returned to this country, having had a very unhappy
time at the Pinjarra Fairbridge Farm School, to visit her sister
who does not wish to have anything to do with her under the mistaken
apprehension that she prostituted herself when she ran away from
the school and still considers her in this light.A third man has
no file or record in this country although he did attend a Fairbridge
Farm School, and we are unable to trace any record of him. He,
again, was at the Middlemoor Home with his siblings who, at the
time he migrated, were not considered medically fit to go to Australia
with him.Another relative would like to go to Australia for two
years with her husband to spend time with her sister. This would
entail selling their property here and as they are unable to work
in Australia they would have no funds when they returned to UK
so are unable to undertake this trip.If there were more funds
available it would be beneficial for the child migrants and their
families and would facilitate the re-unification process. From
Fairbridge's view, a counselling service upon which it would call
both in Australia and in this country would be of enormous benefit
as child migrants could then be professionally helped when researching
their backgrounds. Because of the work Fairbridge now undertakes
in the UK with disadvantaged young people it is not economically
viable to employ a counsellor for the ten or so cases which occur
in a year, many of which are enquiries from Australia rather than
in this country.
February 1998
|
