ANÁLISIS DE LOS PROBLEMAS

A printing press was taken to Van Diemen’s Land by Collins, and its first use was on 20 February 1804 for printing the General Orders. The colony’s first printer was George Clark, who, in 1810 produced the short-lived Derwent Star and Van Diemen’s Land Intelligencer. Andrew Bent, under a life sentence for burglary, arrived in Hobart Town in 1812, and assisted Clark in the printing of his second newspaper, the Van Diemen’s Land Gazette and General Advertiser for its duration, between 14 May and 24 September 1814.8

On the dismissal of Clark, Bent became printer to the government in 1812. In return for his annual salary of £30, use of some of the government-owned printing type, rations, and the services of one government man, Bent printed free of charge, all government notices and the forms required for all departments except the

Commissariat.9 On 1 June 1816, he published the first issue of TheHobart Town Gazette and Southern Reporter, the publication of which, he continued until 24 June

Bent, The Tasmanian Almanack for the year of Our Lord 1825, p.51. 8

E. Morris Miller, Pressmen and Governors: Australian Editors and Writers in Early Tasmania

(Sydney, 1973), pp.81, 84. In December 1818 Bent printed the first separate book published in Van Diemen’s Land, T.E. Wells, Michael Howe. The Last and Worst of the Bushrangers of Van Diemen’s Land (Dubbo, 1979), already referred to in Chapter 2.

9

1825.10 Bent was then printer for the Colonial Times for twelve months, commencing in August 1825.11

TheHobart Town Gazette and Southern Reporter appeared weekly, the first two issues being broadsides, and the following issues were each of two pages. Published under official supervision, all matter for the paper was submitted to the Lieutenant- Governor for approval or correction before printing, and a proof sheet was submitted to him for approval on the morning of publication day.12 According to Henry

Robinson, Sorell’s secretary, Sorell saw all articles intended for publication two days before the paper was printed, at which time he either corrected the articles or

approved of them as he thought appropriate.13 Similar evidence was provided by Bent. In 1820 he told Commissioner Bigge that Sorell always saw the proof sheet of the paper, and he believed that Sorell’s clerk, Thomas Wells, also saw them. Both men corrected the proofs, but the corrections were more often written by Wells than by Sorell.14 In remarks to Bigge in 1820, Sorell said the press was ‘unquestionably’ under the control of government, and no proceedings in any court were given until the report had been before the judge, and reports of the Supreme Court proceedings in Sydney were either written or corrected ‘under the Judge’s eye’.15

Morris Miller, Pressmen and Governors, p.81.

11

J. Woodberry, Andrew Bent and the Freedom of the Press in Van Diemen’s Land, (Hobart, 1972), pp.158-9 for a list of Tasmanian newspapers between 1810 and 1835.

12

HRA III, ii p.775 n99. 13

Historical Records of Australia. Series III. Despatches and Papers relating to the settlement of the States. Volume iii. Tasmania: January-December 1820 (Sydney, 1921), p.471 Robinson to Bigge, 4 May 1820.

14

When questioned by Bigge if he had ever refused any request from settler and merchant Roland Loane, to insert an item in the newspaper, Bent replied that he had frequently received ‘matters of intelligence’ from Loane which he had refused to include. He cited two reasons for his refusal of the publication of articles: either because the articles were written in a manner in which he knew Sorell disapproved, or otherwise the articles were rejected by Sorell himself.16 The question of Sorell’s control over the press was raised by Bigge. In July 1820 he notified Sorell that he believed that the press had undergone some alteration since it was last submitted to Sorell’s notice. Bigge raised his comment in relation to the inclusion in the press of the reports of several cases tried before Mr Justice Field. According to Bigge, the printing of the reports became a subject of his enquiry because they affected the reputation and conduct of certain individuals. His report also involved the loss of the original report of a cause involving Loane and Adolarius Humphrey.17 The lost report was an action for breach of an agreement as a stock agent for three years, in consideration of one-third of the increase of the stock.18

When Sorell’s successor, George Arthur arrived, The Hobart Town Gazette and Southern Reporter was the only paper in the colony, printed by Bent, and according to Arthur, ‘edited by a respectable Gentleman’.19 He thought that the newspaper was

HRA III, iii p.899 Sorell to Bigge, 6 May 1820, replies to statements and complaints by Kemp. 16

HRA III, iii p.317 Bent to Bigge, 24 May 1820. 17

HRA III, iii pp.666-7 Bigge to Sorell, 5 July 1820. Historical Records of Australia. Series III. Despatches and Papers relating to the settlement of the states. Volume iv. (Sydney, 1921), p.721-45 Memorial of Loane.

18

HRA III, iv p.942 n99. 19

HRA III, iv p.877 n87. The editor was Evan Henry Thomas who resigned in June 1825, see Morris Miller, Pressmen and Governors, pp.8-9.

unsafe in ‘such hands as the printers’, and it had very wisely been kept under the censorship of the government.20 However, a few months before Arthur’s arrival in the colony, Sorell had allowed the printer to purchase the press, which resulted in Bent having the paper entirely under his own control. As soon as Arthur assumed government, he removed the editor, Bent, who ‘placed himself in the hands’ of Robert Lathrop Murray, ‘a most unprincipled character of considerable talents, well known formerly as the head of the fictitious Banking Concern in London Sir Robert Lathrope and Co.’21

Arthur was concerned at the effect of the press upon the convict population, and applied to Governor-in-Chief Thomas Brisbane for an act to prevent the publication of any paper without a licence, as it seemed to him to be reasonable that a free constitution should precede a free press,22 therefore a free press was inappropriate in a penal colony. In 1824 Brisbane granted freedom of the press, and was applauded by the progressive faction in New South Wales for ‘taking away the shackles’ from public discussion.23 In this way, Brisbane initiated a free press in Van Diemen’s Land on the basis of the press which had been fostered by Sorell (who had approved the sale), but was later restricted by Arthur.