Guardians of the ANZAC Legend:

A history of the RSL (Australian Returned  Service League) Victorian Branch 1915-1923

By

Laurie Augustine

University of Melbourne

Introduction

The Returned Services League and its predecessors in Australia  have been the main guardians of the Anzac Legend a belief that there was something unique and special about the Australian soldier. This has made it one of the most powerful associations in Australian society. It has also become a bastion of conservatism. While the majority of those who served in the First AIF were working class.,[1] the ex servicemen organization were claimed to be conservative or reactionary. Although Conservatism can be defined without identifying it with the policies of any party,[2] it does derive from the sense that one belongs to some continuing preexisting social order.[3] This has caused the RSL to side with the existing social order  at the time of the Great War in Australia and at other times that of most of its members.

Some historians like Alistair Thomsom believe that in returning for supporting the powers that be, the RSL was granted official recognition.  Sub branches formed  special forces of League members at times of crisis, to maintain law and order. More particularly the sub branches offered carefully controlled meeting places as an alternative to the more threatening gatherings of returned men in pubs and street corners.[4]

This may have been necessary to preserve the Anzac Legend concept of brave fighting men rather than emphasizing the lack of discipline displayed by some Australian soldiers in Egypt and after the war in Australia.

Michael Cathcart in Defending the National Tuckshop  claims that  the ‘Conservative leadership of the RSL was not attempting to quell the militancy of the diggers…but to use them as guardians of capital and Empire…’[5] Most of these  assessments were based on the belief that all branches of the RSSILA were led by commissioned officers. They were referred to as ‘a Tory ticket of employers and officers even a haw-haw brigade.’[6]                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      

             Although many of the leaders of the Victorian branch were junior officers, most of the critics of the RSL state that the leadership put their interests ahead of the class interests of its working- class members. However ex- servicemen with working- class origins may have been different from other working - class men. Ken Inglis thinks that the class consciousness of working- class  ‘Anzacs’ was diluted by the experience of the AIF and its remembrance.[7]  Although the majority of the members of  the AIF were working men, they were more conservative than similar soldiers in modern wars. Despite stories of under age enlistments in the AIF, as a volunteer army, over twenty per cent were over 31 years at the date of enlistment.[8] These were often officers who were more likely to become leaders of  men even after the war. Some of these become active leaders in ex- soldiers organizations like the Returned Soldiers League.

While 80% of soldiers were members  of the RSL at first, by the  mid 1920s  many had ceased to be members and those who remained tended to be the older soldiers.  As some  veterans  said people tend not to join such organizations until they are older and their family responsibilities are lighter.[9]This may explain why membership increased in the late1920s and 30s.  If the leaders were mainly officers and older men this might explain why the organization tended to be conservative. These men had grown up before the war and were part of the generation of 1914 which had power and experience before the war.

Although it has been stated that promotion to officer rank in the AIF was more democratic than in most armies with some  promotion  from the ranks, education and  manners often influenced the choice of  officers.[10] Also many of the earlier officers were from the Light Horse in which many were from leading rural families. Despite Bean’s  view that the AIF was a democratic army, many of the Officers were still from an elite section of society. That education was taken in account in promotions and commissions is showed by the large percentage of Scotch, Wesley and Geelong Grammar ex students who became officers.[11] The accounts of these schools show that  the majority of their students became commissioned officers. This tended to make these leaders more conservative than the average  person  because of the high  proportion of men educated at private schools  in their ranks. However the occupation with the largest percentage of members  of the AIF was laborers. When you add workers in industry and primary production this makes up nearly sixty percent of enlistments.[12]  Most of those would have described themselves  as members of the working class. The question is then raised why ex servicemen who were mainly working men allowed their principle organization to become led by officers whose background was so different ?

Some historians such as Cornell and Irving in Class Structure in Australian History have argued that ‘the  “Australian” culture of the First AIF … was another form of containment of working- class culture’.[13] Marilyn Lake sees the RSL policy of seeking preference in employment for returned soldiers rather than unionists as a deliberate policy, and forcing soldier wage earners into competition with other workers, therefore focusing the soldiers’ discontent on the non soldiers.[14] The war created for the first time a mass base for conservative politics and  checked the working class advance.[15] Lake believes that fights between police and idle soldiers were one of the reasons land settlement programs were proposed.[16] She also believes that an attempt to develop cooperative industries fell into decline as conservative politicians condemned them as something like a Soviet affair,[17] and wanted  the Anzac tweed cooperative  industry to die a natural death.[18]Lake thinks the official clique of the Victorian RSSILA was out of touch with rank and file members.[19] Even though the majority of members of the RSL at its beginning were workers Lake claimed that the  organization was used to divide workers.[20]  Alistair Thomson says that, ‘in return for supporting the powers that be, the RSL was granted official recognition. Sub branches formed special forces of League members to maintain law and order. More particularly the sub branches offered carefully controlled meeting places as an alternative to the more threatening gatherings of returned men in pubs and street corners.’ [21] Thomson does believe there were some radical members in the Victorian branch of the RSL but that they were defeated in 1919 after widespread protests.

            In Victoria a democratic ticket representing rank and file members with labor 

      sympathies contested executive elections against a Tory ticket of employers and

     officers….But the outrage against hooligans and militants that followed the soldier’s 

     riots of mid 1919 strengthened the loyalists and left wing critics within the RSSILA

     were silenced or expelled….when the haw-haw brigade won…it became a marginal

     interest group.’[22]

Others like Bobbie Oliver believed that some branches, such as Western Australia, were under conservative control from the start and radical members were forced to form an alternative organization.[23] A similar situation applied in Queensland where a Returned Soldiers Labour Union was formed. This organization failed to attract enough members as the Federal Government in power was non Labor and would not negotiate with a Labor ex service group, so the RSL emerged as the only returned soldiers' organization. By 1919 when most soldiers returned to Australia the RSL was the only viable returned soldiers’organization.[24]

Some see a more sinister reason as to why the RSL was conservative. Michael Cathcart in Defending the National Tuckshop sees the RSL leadership being used to prevent radical soldiers taking control. In Queensland, according to Cathcart, the RSL was used to usurp the role of the police, forming an army of 2000 RSL members to fight Bolshevik uprising.[25]

In other conservative states he claims, the police were used as strike breakers. Cathcart claims that a secret militia was formed in Melbourne in 1923.[26] Although he admits leadership came from the CMF with some members of the Permanent Army and Police, he does state that the RSL was mobilizing  support at least among members who were neither Jewish nor Catholic.[27]Cathcart claims that the ‘Conservative leadership of the RSL was not attempting to quell the militancy of the diggers… but to use them  as guardians of the value of capital and Empire…’[28]

             Seckuless  and Rees, while admitting the RSL turned conservative,  claim this was consistent with changes in society. The Anzac legend  and its symbols were always consistent with Imperial loyalty. The AIF fought for the Empire.[29]

Its main and most sacred flag was the Union Jack and most soldiers had it draped over their coffin as late as the funeral  of John Monash in 1931. God Save the Queen remained the Nation Anthem to the 1960s and is still sung at Anzac services.  These symbols were sacred to the fighting men and few wanted to change them with advancing  years. To many members broken by their experience in the war, the RSL was a place where members recalled the good times and the mates they have served with in the struggle.[30] As Ken Inglis, states the working  men  who joined up were more likely than the working men who stayed behind to let pride of race overcome pride of class.[31]

To many like Sekules and Inglis the RSL was conservative because its members were conservative. ‘The formation of the Returned Soldiers Associations was an expression of the community’s desire to help… as well as the veterans own desire for comradeship and support’.[32] Supporters of the RSL also believe that the views held by the League have been reasonably in accord with views of the rest of the community.

In this thesis I will look at these questions by examining the actions of the RSL from its formation to the police strike of 1923. I will look particularly at  the Victorian Branch. From its own minutes, newspaper reports and some secondary sources I will show how it was divided throughout this period and that no group had complete control. The leaders tried to steer a path between extremists from the right and left. By looking at the debates reported in the minutes I will see whether the meetings were democratic.  I will asked how it relates to  the criticism of historians like Lake, Thomson and Cathcart.

While their comments are about the RSL as a national body and over a longer period I will see how the actions of the Victorian Branch in this period relate to their broader assessment.

In the first chapter I will look at the  early returned soldiers association such as the Returned Wounded Soldiers Association and how the national body was formed to become the Returned Sailors and Soldiers Imperial League of Australia.  The focus will be on the leadership at the federal, Victorian and local level. Who were the leaders and why were officers elected?  Also I will look at the organization attitude to Imperialism and Nationalism in relation to the rest of the community and how this led to anti - German  and anti- foreigner feelings. I will illustrate from the minutes the divided attitude to  Catholics and industrial  protests. Lastly  I will examine the relationship with Governments with possible divisions between the Victorian Branch and  the Federal president Dyett.

Chapter Two will look at the protests of 1919 and  various reactions as shown by the minutes and newspaper reports. The final chapter will look at the events between 1920 and 1923 and show how they revealed a divided executive. The Victorian Branch took a cautious approach in response to the attempts of the left and right to influence its policies and I will show how it took a middle ground. This can be demonstrated by looking at its attitude to governments, the labor movement, Catholics and patriotic societies. In particular I will look at the 1922 St. Patrick’s  Day march and the 1923 Police strike.

I will look at these events to see how the RSL tied to guard its version of the Anzac Legend. It would not allow any other organization to usurp its claim to represent the real Anzacs and it would use them to stop any breakdown in law and order. In return it would gain for its members the best conditions of any ex servicemen in the world.

Chapter One:  Origins and Early Years

The early Returned Soldiers Associations like, the Returned Wounded Soldiers Association, were concerned with providing employment for their members. As early as 1915 they insisted on preference in employment for an ex serviceman, even if wounded, over a strong healthy man who was not a returned soldier.[33] Many of the soldiers were accused of misbehavior in the streets of Melbourne as early as April 1915[34] and the association had to defend them by asking the press not to publish articles about returned soldiers begging in the streets and expressing disgust at  critical comments made by the Lord Mayor of Sydney.[35]

When the Returned Soldiers Associations of Queensland, NSW, Victoria and South Australia formed the Returned Sailors and Soldiers Imperial League in 1916, these problems continued to worry the leaders. Some officers wanted to be in charge of each branch as in South Africa. In that country officers were spread around the various branches so there were officers in charge of each branch.  But it was decided to form branches based on location so some branches had many former officers while others had few. While officers were in charge of  some State branches it was difficult to extend this to all sub branches. Many officers in NSW turned the Association down.[36]  However there is evidence that both at Federal and State level as well as in many sub branches, officers tended to be the leaders.

            All Federal Presidents and two Federal Secretaries in this period were commissioned officers. However the Victorian State level only two presidents were commissioned  officers.  Most other office bearers were junior officers.(see Appendix One) [37] The first State president of the RSA, R.G Bowen was a Commander in the Navy having been promoted from  lieutenant during the war .He was born in 1879  and served in the Militia from 1900.[38] The founder of the RSSILA ,Victorian Branch and first President, W Mc Kenzie, was a Sergeant. He had risen from the ranks and was a corporal in the Returned Wounded and Sick Soldiers Association in 1915. He was one of the men who were sent home from Egypt early because of an illness.[39] The first President after the war was from the Navy, Petty Officer Palmer.  A later President H J Martin was promoted to corporal at the end of the war and remained in the army until 1919 .He was born in Richmond in 1894,enlisting at twenty one after working as a clerk and having served three years with the senior cadets at Melbourne High School. He served in the Pay Corps in France and after the war in London where he studied accountancy.[40] Martin was also President of the Kew Sub Branch. Besides  Bowen, Lieutenant Colonel E A Turnbull, was the only  senior officer who was president in this period. Of the Secretaries whose rank is known, the first, Murray, was a private and the longest serving  secretary, David was a warrant officer. David had served as a sergeant during the war being sent home in 1916. Like Mc Kenzie he seems to have been promoted in Australia.

Critics had claimed that the RSL was  out of touch with its members because of the domination of officers. It was founded by officers and its early office bearers were officers. Five of the six Vice Presidents of one of the RSL’s  predecessors, the Returned Wounded Soldiers Association, were officers.[41].  When the Returned Sailors and Soldiers Imperial League was formed its first federal president was Lieutenant Colonel, Bolton. Presidents  of some other branches also had similar ranks. [42] Many of these senior officers were very experienced, for example Bolton had thirty-nine years of military experience as an active militia officer.[43] Even the man many wanted to be President, General Monash, was over 50 with over twenty years pre war military experience. Later presidents and most other office bearers were at least non commissioned officers. Even the presidents of working class sub branches like Footscray and Brunswick were officers and business men.[44]In other sub branches like Essendon and Chelsea even if the president was of a lesser rank he was at least a businessman.[45]

In the officer- dominated branch of Hawthorn the leaders were all officers and graduates of elite colleges like Scotch. Such men were more likely to be leaders so it was not surprising they were elected to office. Because of their experience in the army it was natural for soldiers to elect officers as leaders .A survey of American servicemen by R R Grinker and J P Spiegel indicated that those who had been in combat would search for a group with strong leadership.[46] It is likely that many ex servicemen would regard officers and businessmen as providing strong leadership. This would apply even if they were not born in Australia. Many of these leaders were British Australians. The first Federal President, Lieutenant-Colonel W.K Bolton was born in England in 1861 although he lived in Australia most of his life.  British ex servicemen were admitted to the RSSILA from  its inception. Most were Imperialists. One officer at the Special Congress of June 1916 said:     ‘I would rather have 20,000 members in the League who can think imperial than 100,000 who can  not.’[47]  

This attitude caused the name Imperial League to  be adopted.  Most members were loyal to the Empire even if they did not admire the British soldiers. The official historian C.E. W. Bean , although English born, idealized Australians as a reincarnation of the 16^th century Briton…but his strictures upon the British staff at Pozieres…stood out.[48] This British- Australian duality was widespread before the war and survived the war in Australia not withstanding some change in proportion.[49]

Army leaders such as Monash, Chauvel and White had all been influenced by this belief.  George Reid was able to say at Tamworth that even if we have gained some independence by being able to make appointments without the approval of Downing Street …now  ‘there never was a time when Australia clung  to her with a feeling of warmer and closer loyalty and affection.’[50] While some writers saw a growth of Nationalism  after the war most of those who fought in the war for the Empire were not afraid to use the word Imperialist. The population had grown from 3,766,000 to 5,435,000 between1901 and 1919, but the proportion of non British, born Australians had  risen only slightly.[51] Many of these non - British men quickly anglicized their names and dressed like Englishmen as they tried to hide their foreign origins.  For one thing both the nationalists and the imperialist were united on was their hatred for the foreigner.

 Motions were passed at the Congress of the RSSILA calling for the dismissal of public servants with German parents, the deportation of a farmer who advertised for a German -Australian girl and the closing of all German schools, Clubs and Churches.[52] For example, it is not surprising that  the Brand family, a member of which was one of the stalwarts who set up the Belmore RSL, had changed their name from the German ‘Brandt’ during the war.[53] It is doubtful they would be as acceptable to the RSL with a German name. Even this way out was denied in 1917 when it become an offense to anglicize one’s name. Anonymous letter-writers signed themselves as ‘Britisher” or ‘Loyal Australian’ to denounce a neighbour with a German surname…not even John Monash whose father had been naturalized in 1856 nor the New South Wales Premier William Holman who resisted demands to dismiss all his German public servants, were safe.[54]

Even the Catholics had to be careful.   While the RSSILA was non sectarian there were many debates about the role of Catholics during the early meetings.  Catholic leaders in some states had opposed conscription and many of the leaders of the RSSILA were suspicious of Catholics.

However Catholics formed 20% of members of the AIF,  although there were only 8 Catholics in a sample of over 100 Officers.[55] Despite this, Catholics made up a large percentage of members of the RSSILA.[56] The recruitment from the Catholic public school Xavier, was in line with recruitment from other public schools. 'Of the 400 men under 35 of age in 1914, 75% enlisted’[57] Even although most Catholics were from Irish backgrounds they were prepared to fight for their country. Charges of sectarian bias were made in Victorian over the appointment of a secretary. Mr. G. Burkett had charged that a Catholic applicant could not get the position of secretary as he was not a Freemason. The President , Petty Officer, G. L. Palmer denied he had  said this but the Vice President had asked if the religious point of view had had the slightest influence on his mind.  Despite the denial the matter was referred to a committee headed by General Elliott.[58]Catholics were members and some like McKenzie and  Donelly of Western Australia were delegates to congresses of the RSSILA. Donelly had to ask if Catholic chaplains were welcome[59] as most services were conducted by Church of England ministers only and this was not change until the 1930s.  The Catholic Archbishop of Melbourne Doctor Mannix refused to allow Catholic soldiers to attend non Catholic Anzac services.

The most divisive issue between  returned soldiers was not primarily about religion but about how to handle protests.  Strikes and industrial protest were common even in the war years.  A stoppage in the New South Wales railways soon spread to ports and coal mines. Hughes using the War Precaution Act de-registered the unions and arrested the leaders.[60]

The RSSILA was just as divided on industrial issues as the rest of the community. There were groups who regarded all industrial action as treason. Some of these tried to push the idea of one great union  for all ex servicemen. However this was opposed by many other delegates  who pointed out that most worker members were already unionists. During a meeting of the Victorian Executive on 21 May 1919 a motion  was moved expressing ‘sympathy with our brothers who are engaged on the wharves against unjust treatment.’ An amendment stated that as there are returned men on both sides of the industrial dispute the association urged the repatriation department to place on the sustenance roll all men concerned to such time as the Industrial trouble was settled.[61] Although the amendment was lost there was still some support for radical action on the Executive.

            The first Federal President, Bolton, became a member of the National Party  but all other presidents kept free of party politics. The next president, Captain Dyett’s ‘relationship with the Prime Minister Hughes  was blighted over the payment of a gratuity to ex servicemen and relations between Dyett and Hughes were never very cordial thereafter.’[62] Dyett, a Catholic, was a close friend of John Wren, a wealthy supporter of the Labor Party.[63]  The Victorian Executive supported the more radical cash gratuity offered by the Labor Party. Dyett refused to condemn the Victorian branch.  He was elected to take a more radical position, than his predecessor. At first, at least on issues advancing ex servicemen’s rights, he was outspoken.  A captain, Dyett had the usual officer’s dislike of disorder. At the  Special Congress of the RSSILA on  15 July 1919, Dyett called for unity and said ‘there is little ground for adverse criticism  of  the Government by the League rather it is in the method and means of administration that criticism has been necessary’.[64] It was this cautious attitude that some have labeled as conservative. Dyett was born in Bendigo in 1891, and had attended Marist Brothers College. He was a much younger man than Bolton and had a wider view of the world.

The Victorian Branch was also led by younger men. J W Mc Kenzie had been a delegate to the Returned Wounded Soldiers Association in September 1915. He was described by one newspaper as the founder of the RSSILA.  McKenzie was chairman in May 1917 and replaced Commander R G Bowen as president in that year.  In the meantime he had been promoted to Sergeant.  He supported several radical causes such as keeping the League non political and giving the vote to returned soldiers who were under 21. Mc Kenzie was replaced as president early in 1918 but continued on as a member of the Executive Council and several Committees.

The new president was Petty Officer Palmer the equivalent rank in the navy to sergeant in the army.  Palmer appeared to have been elected as a compromise candidate. In a letter to the Truth newspaper  members of the Victorian Branch of the RSSILA were asked to reject ‘a  ticket of commissioned officers who cannot forget they were once officers…. In favor of democratic diggers headed by G A Burkett’[65] In a later  letter one of the democratic diggers, George Lee, advocated a vote for Palmer. This was accepted by the Democrats who claimed a vote for either Burkett or Palmer would ‘rout the Tory clique and put the league on the high road to progress.’[66]  The fact that Palmer was from the Navy which was underrepresented and a lower rank than Burkett may have helped his election. Palmer had served with  Bowen in the  Royal Australian Naval Brigade which served in New Guinea.

Chapter Two:  The Disputes of 1919

Heroes of Yesterday involved in disgraceful behavior

The attitude of various sections of the RSSILA to the protests and industrial unrest of 1919 illustrated the difficulties of supporting radical ex - service protest yet still keeping law and order.  The civil disorder of 1919 could have been explained by such causes as the restlessness of returned soldiers, the echoes of reflected trouble from abroad and the larrikin element that long existed in Australian major cities.[67] For example on 23 March 1919 the Brisbane Industrial Council staged demonstrations against the continued operation of the War Precautions Act, including the prohibition of the Red flag. Four hundred men marched with the Red Flag including the Russian Worker’s Association. At 7-30 PM an impromptu meeting of ex soldiers both in and out of uniform was held and decided to march on the Russian Workers’ Association. Nineteen men were injured including the Police Commissioner. Next evening a Loyalist demonstration forced a man to take off his hat and sing the national anthem.[68]

Such unruly behavior by ex servicemen no matter the motive was not favored by the  local branch of the RSSILA. A second loyalist demonstration was addressed by the president of the Queensland branch of the Returned Sailors and Soldiers Imperial League, Private Douglas. To reinforced  the  support for law and order, 1750 returned men marched on Parliament House in a discipline body led by Major A G. Bolingbroke.[69] The fact that the Queensland Government was Labor seems to have made the position difficult for the RSSILA in that state. Even though the President was a private, an officer appeared necessary to restore order and discipline. The Queensland ex servicemen were divided as there was a rival ex servicemen's body in the state, the Returned Sailors and Soldiers Labor League. One of its  aims was to loyally support the Australian Labor Party.[70] As the RSSILA was closer to the Federal Government which handled most repatriation matters the rival organizations gradually lost influence as conservative governments stayed in power throughout the 1920s in the federal sphere.

Even where Labor was in power in some State Governments and local councils, the RSSILA  was able to gain concessions by appealing to patriotism and a suppose debt to return men.  The  local Conservative press was quick to distinguished between the loyal diggers, and young men who had been deaf to the calls of patriotism and chivalry, the shirkers, the Australians who have done their bit will have no time for these eligible wasters.[71]The fact that soldiers were responsible for many of the civil disturbances was denied by the Conservative Press in Australia. The RSSILA was quite prepared to censure the Press and even its own minutes to prevent soldiers being seen in a bad light.  It did take credit for turning the ugly position into peaceful if rowdy demonstrations after the League intervened unlike in other countries..[72] However there was still fears in Australia that civil unrest would occur here if ex servicemen were not led by organizations like the RSSILA. The Government had a  counter espionage Bureau to keep records of returned soldiers political activities.[73]

Peace marches were organized in various states by the RSSILA.  The Melbourne Peace March went off without incident but there was trouble in the offering. The procession consisted of 7000 soldiers, sailors and airmen.

After the procession theaters were invaded, trams derailed and there was an attempt to rush the Town Hall when police were holding soldiers accused of being disturbers of the peace.[74]After these riots some RSSILA sub branches offered to form special forces of League members to enforce law and order.[75] In a report by the Victorian Executive to the RSSILA congress, a delegate, Captain Burkett, admitted he led a deputation to the Spencer Street Police Commander to put the views of the soldiers. The crowd demanded the release of returned soldiers and the suspension of a police constable responsible for attacking the soldiers, but the Police Commissioner said he had no power to accede to the demands. The crowd then proceeded to the Premier’s Office.[76] At this stage a motion was carried that the whole matter of the peace riots be dropped at the congress. No further mention of the events is made in the minutes.

However  the newspapers  reported a meeting with the Premier, who was injured by a missile, thrown by someone in a crowd that had invaded the State Offices. Also next day a crowd attacked the army barracks, it was claimed to seize guns from  the armory.[77]Later it was revealed that they were trying to reach the headquarters of the civil police inside the Barracks.[78] This was a huge embarrassment to the RSSILA  as the Age  newspaper had attacked them ‘as a howling mob, heroes of yesterday involved in disgraceful behavior.’

Although the Argus exonerated the returned men and blamed the non-military hoodlums and the revolutionist’s who influence the minds of the soldiers, and urged on violence and destruction.[79] Federal President Dyett visited the Premier in hospital to apologise. A disciplinary military parade was ordered at the Domain. Here General Brand the State Commandant addressed 4,000 men dressed in business suits on the duties of good citizenship. While many of the demonstrators came from the inner northern suburbs,[80]there does not appear many dressed in working clothes at this parade.[81]

Alistair Thomson points out that middle class Melbourne was horrified with the riots[82] Some sub branches like the Coburg RSL  ‘ were determined to “root out undesirable” members and formed a corps of special constables to suppress “any riots or disorderly conduct” in the district’.[83]These appeals were made by conservative mayors like the Mayor of Coburg and the Mayor of Brighton.[84] However there is little evidence that many members were expelled or  corps of special constables formed.  Other sub branches such as Footscray wrote a letter to the editor of the local paper stating ‘ While desiring to uphold law and order at all costs and supporting wholeheartedly the sentiments expressed by the main meeting at the Domain…express disgust at the action of several members of the police at ill-timed, hasty and brutal action.’[85] This indicated that the movement was divided on the issue. This letter was signed by Private Will F. Blyth the Secretary of the Footscray & Yarraville Sub Branch of the RSSILA. He represented mainly working class  members who blamed the police for the violence.

Even leaders of the Victorian Branch while trying to restore order acknowledged that the soldiers had grievances that needed to be remedied. Sergeant Mc Kenzie told the men “let us take your grievances to the proper authorities and have them remedied by proper authorities”[86] Although he, like most other leaders, went on to try and persuade the protesters  not to be tempted into disorder or anarchy and only use constitutional means, he did so because he believed nothing could be achieved by mob rule. He was described as a most earnest leader and founder of the Returned Sailors and Soldiers Imperial League.[87]

League officials asked that mounted police be withdrawn and when this was done order was restored. General Brand had suggested the parade of soldiers in the Domain. This tactic according to Humphrey Mc Queen was designed to counteract the soldiers unpredictability by substituting the discipline of the parade ground for the lack of habitual

work routines.[88]

While there was much concern at the effects on the reputation of soldiers ,the protests had caused, it is difficult to say that the leadership ignored the soldiers’ causes. Further protests were held[89] although the leadership prevented them getting out of control.

The RSL  wanted to guard its version of the legend that these ex soldiers were not only brave but law abiding. While soldiers throughout the world were protesting that governments had not lived up to their promises to help them, the RSL, did tried to make sure that the Australian Government was far in advance in the care of our veterans than most other countries.[90]

That such a claim can be made and remain unchallenged indicates that the RSL, while preserving the reputation of its members as supporters of law and order did gain exceptionable benefits for Australian ex servicemen. It therefore guarded the Anzac legend by strengthening the power and rights of ex servicemen in Australia.

Chapter Three:  1920-1923  Years of discord

While membership of the RSLILA had increased to 114,700 by October 1919 and even more were claimed at the end of the year, it began to decrease from 1920 and in 1923 it stood at only 24,631.[91] The reason for this fall has been suggested by some as the hostility of Labor diggers.[92] But other reasons included the  fact that men with young families had little time for the club.[93] Historians  such as Marion Lake and Alistair Thomson believe that the Victorian Branch became more conservative  after 1919 with the expulsion of G R Roberts and the change in sides of Captain Burkett. The latter had some weeks before defended the rights of his comrades  to support striking wharf labourers, but now urged his comrades ‘to abide by constitutional methods and steer clear of silly red ragging Bolsheviks.’[94] Captain Burkett had presented the demands of the soldiers at the protest outside the Premier’s Office in 1919. Although the  Federal  President, Secretary and  Treasurer did not change  in 1920 they appear to take a more cautious approach than before 1919.

Changes did take place in Victoria but there were no wholesale dismissals or resignations from the Executive. In fact Petty Officer Palmer was replaced as Victorian President by the even more junior officer Martin. This does not appear to have been a takeover by conservative elements but a shift by the Executive  towards a more  cautious stance. This may have been due to concern at the actions of 1919 repeating themselves and harming the reputation of the RSSILA. Martin had worked as a clerk before and during the war and had studied accountancy. He  may have been appointed  because of the financial troubles of the organization as membership decreased and government support declined.

            There was conflict over personalities during 1920. Mr Roberts walked out of an  Victorian Executive Council Meeting  before being dismissed with some members refusing to sit next to him.[95] There is some doubt that Roberts had always had been  really as  radical as claimed by Lake and Thomson, because he was listed  amongst those not to vote for by the democrats before the 1919 election.[96] Another delegate Greenwood complained about certain members of the executive not using the League for the purpose it was intended[97]The suggestion was that some members were using their connection with the League to advance business interests. The Financial report was attacked by a delegate who said he would sooner get into a cow shed with a dying man than with a thousand men in financial difficulties. His motion to not accept the report was rejected and the report was accepted.[98]

Throughout 1921,  many sub branches  reported financial  problems. These included Wangaratta, South Melbourne, Brunswick, Richmond and Collingwood. [99] Even the State Executive itself was in financial difficulties,  in  1924 and could not attend the Federal Council. Several sub branches closed, including Brunswick and Chelsea.

It has been suggested that some sub branches refused to pay money to the Victorian Executive because they disliked the policies of the branch office.[100] Lieutenant Colonel Turnbull had been President since 1921 but had some personality conflicts with the sub branches. Born in 1894 he was still a young man when he joined the RSSILA.

He had to apologize for unseemly conduct early in 1920.[101] Yet he was elected unopposed as Victorian president in  1921. Opposition seems to have grown  to his running of the financial affairs of the branch. He did not get on well with Dyett and was forced to stand down for a year.[102]Turnbull was a  founder of the All for Australia League which supported the Lyons Government. He was active in promoting British  films and became Managing Director of Hoyts Theaters Ltd.[103] Conflict in the RSSILA seems to be caused by domestic disputes rather than any political policy. Some employees were dismissed  for disciplinary reason and others  for slackness of work.[104] Even the previous Victorian President, Palmer was declared ineligible to be re appointed and asked to transfer from Warragul to  Brunswick branch where he was a resident.[105]He was still allowed to be a Councilor as were  earlier Presidents, McKenzie and Martin. Mc Kenzie a catholic,  seemed to be critical of Palmer over matters of religion, and was a supporter of Dyett.[106]  Martin  was elected as Secretary  in  April 1920 but was not confirmed in May as he created an unfavourable impression.[107] Yet Martin was elected President by June 1920.[108]

All these disputes seem to indicate a divided executive with members trying to gain power at the expense of others. Dyett’s view that infighting had caused the financial problems of the Victorian Branch seems correct. While there may have been a shift to more cautious actions this seemed to be necessary by the problems encountered by the previous divided Executive. There were protests  by some sub branches against attempts to create an Officers Caste.[109] The official branch magazine the Bayonet,  continued to attack monopolies and support co-operative trading societies. [110] There was still opposition to a Conservative takeover or  to openly supporting conservative political causes.   Two attempts to have the Victorian branch support loyalty movements were rejected. In one case a telegram from the Sydney State Secretary to promote a simultaneous demonstration against an insult to the flag at a May  Day Demonstration was rejected by the State Executive.[111] A second  proposal by Mr Hunt, a solicitor, to join a Loyalty Council was also rejected.[112] Although the Victorian Executive has been accused of secretly supporting conservative political movements by Alistair Thomson and Michael Cathcart it seems unlikely that such a divided executive could have taken an official  stand  on these issues.  They seem more concerned with  distancing themselves from political or sectarian movements. Such organizations were not allowed to use Anzac House.[113]

The Executive tried to stop people using names like ‘Digger’ or ‘Anzac’ in promoting businesses or political causes. Dyett had refused to support any political party in the elections or support the formation of an ex- soldiers political party.  While the majority of members supported this,[114] there were some who wanted to replace him and take a more party political stand. One of these was the Victorian President Ernest Turnbull who even acted as Federal President when Dyett was overseas. But his own problems in Victoria made him ineffective against the Dyett.[115]Even attempts to have Monash replaced Dyett failed as Monash would not contest an election. In 1920 Monash  had accepted nomination by three state branches but when he found out that the other branches had nominated Captain Dyett and there was a faction fight he refused to stand.

‘It was  out of the question as it was nearly a full time job.' The State Government would never agree to it, and he would never dream of contesting an election.’[116] Another attempt by Ernest Turnbull  was rejected by Monash with the remarks that it was not a great compliment as it seemed the League was turning to him when it was in danger of decay owing to defective leadership.[117] Despite this, Monash continued to advise both Dyett and Turnbull. Neither Monash nor Dyett were supporters of the various right wing movements that appeared in the 1920s. Monash refused many requests that he should rule the country because he would be better than the awful politicians.

He rejected attempts to command the Knights of Empire or the Empire  Loyalty League to fight against Communist and Irish-Catholics.[118] As a Jew with German ancestors he  could not support intolerance and was anxious not to antagonize any section of public opinion.  Dyett  as a Catholic also would not support any similar organizations. He tried to get on with all shades of political and religious opinion.

Others did tried to use the their military background in election campaigns and in advertising their businesses. Thomson believed there was an RSL campaign in the Brunswick Council election in 1919 against  Labor councilors who did not support preference for ex- servicemen in all cases.[119] ‘By the close of 1919, leading members of the local RSL had adopted an overt party political role in Brunswick’[120] The conflict between the local RSL and the Labor councilors continued in Brunswick even after it was reconstituted. Lindsay Tanner now prominent Labor member and historian, said it was an organization of the officers' caste and middle class. The reconstituted executive included an insurance representative, a postmaster, the Town Clerk, and businessmen.[121]

            This may have been repeated in other areas.  Sometimes both candidates claimed to be dinkum diggers as in the Nunawading Council Elections in 1921. When one candidate called himself a fully qualified returned soldier his opponent  supporters also listed his returned soldier qualification although he had voted differently on some cases of preference for soldiers.[122] Neither was endorsed by the RSL, although one successful candidate, Norman Brown was described by the conservative newspaper as a young returned soldier candidate.[123]   Even businessmen claimed some links with soldiers . So such businesses as 'The Diggers Timber Yard'[124] and ‘Hughes  Returned Soldiers Shop’[125]advertised in local papers but such advertisements were opposed by the Victorian RSL branch. [126]However it was difficult to prevent people using such names for either their commercial or political advantage.

It is difficult to say whether either businesses or candidates had RSL support.

There is no evidence from the minutes or newspaper reports that the League  was giving official recognition to right wing groups which preached a conspiracy theory involving Catholics or Communists.  The only time the RSL was intolerant was in defending the rights of soldiers against their detractors. As Bill Gammage has said ‘This was in part the spirit of the RSL, which many joined to show a united front to their detractors, to keep in touch with old companions and to pass over and over the momentous events which had first brought them together.’[127]This may have made the ex soldiers a separate group who were prepared to defend one another against all attacks. This led to absurd arguments that newspapers should not use such headlines as ‘soldiers in trouble’ when they were charged in court. One branch secretary saw this as a reflection on all soldiers.[128]As Bill Gammage points out they had become a race apart but this was their pride as well as their burden. When they met they usually recalled the good times and the mates who had served them in the struggle.[129] It was only the good times they recalled as they repressed certain aspects of the war experience and for some men the gap between the public legend and personal experience was painful and debilitating.

As Thomson points out in his article ‘Embattled Manhood, Gender, Memory and the Anzac Legend’, the memory of people like Percy Bird was very selective and in common with masculine identity. Soldiers could rarely admit in public they had been  frightened.[130]  ‘The local returned  servicemen club provided a ready made support network…for continuing of the war time process - some aspects highlighted- others silenced’.[131]

Therefore it is not surprising that if any soldiers were attacked by outsiders the returned men stuck together. This often led to intolerant attacks on what they regarded as the enemy, whether non returned workers or people who opposed conscription. This led to attacks on some Labor politicians and some Catholic church leaders. The motivation for these attacks was to defend their comrades not political or religious bigotry. While some extremists might use these sentiments to fan up hatred it is difficult to see this as a conspiracy to use returned soldiers to foster right wing causes. It is also true that some Labor figures and church leaders like Dr Mannix did inflame the situation themselves. They were opposed to conscription so this made it difficult for ex servicemen organizations to trust them. Even after the war some labor councilors refused to give donations to memorials like the Shrine because it was claimed they glorified war.[132] Labor union leaders were opposed to the RSSILA campaign for preference for ex servicemen over other workers. In addition during the  period 1917 -1922 the thinking of the Australian left was dominated by industrial unionism, [133]so this put them into opposition to attempts to weaken unionism.

The Communist Party also supported a united front with Labor in the early  twenties,[134] thus it was difficult to distinguished between them and Labor .Many ex servicemen felt that the Communist had betrayed the allied cause in Russia.  Some Labor and church leaders did support conscription and were members of the RSSILA. The Labor member for Melbourne, Dr W Maloney, was a personal friend of G.J. Dyett and the Labor  member for Reid , P.E.Coleman, was on the New South Wales State Council .[135]Archbishop Duhig was a foundation member of the Queensland branch.[136]Relationships between the RSSILA and the Catholic Church were better in other states than in Victoria. The Archbishop of Melbourne, Dr Mannix, did make provocative speeches. However he was often misquoted in the conservative and sometimes anti -Catholic Victorian press. In fact Mannix had spoken only twice before the first Referendum.[137]Yet he was made a bogey to frighten wavering Protestants.[138] Such  Mannix statements as ‘Australia first and the Empire second’ were interpreted as opposed to the very things the soldiers fought for- the Empire.

When the band played God Save the Queen at the 1918 St Patricks’ Day Procession, Dr Mannix refused to take off his biretta, yet he did so when a float dedicated to the heroes of Easter Week 1916 passed.[139] However DR Mannix did have some ex servicemen support as shown in the 1920 procession, by a guard of Honour of fourteen Victoria Cross winners followed by ten thousand returned soldiers and sailors.[140] This had been arranged by John Wren a friend of Captain Dyett. The final insult was in the 1921 procession  when a drunken man carrying the Union Jack at the head of the procession was attacked by a republican who made a dive for the small flag.  As Bishop Phelan explained in a letter to the Age,  no Irishman or Irish Australian could be got to carry the flag. But it was insisted by the Melbourne City Council that it be carried at the head of the procession. This caused the flag to be exposed to insult.[141]  As a result of this insult, the Melbourne City Council  refused permission to hold the march in 1922. [142]A meeting was held in Cathedral Hall saying that diggers resented the action of the Council. The article about the meeting was headed ‘Meeting of returned sailors and soldiers’[143]

A motion  was sent by the Lilydale district of the RSL, that the State Executive publicly dissociate the League from the resolution recently passed at the Cathedral Hall that Returned Soldiers would lead the procession on 17 March 1922.  The Executive passed a milder motion that it desired it  to be known that the resolution did not emanate from the Victorian Branch of the RSSILA nor was the meeting held under its auspices. An amendment to defer the matter was defeated.[144] The reaction of the RSSILA could not be called anti- Catholic in the circumstances. It merely disassociated itself from a meeting that it did not authorize.  Despite the provocation of having floats glorifying the Irish rebels and Dr Mannix’s fiery speeches denouncing Britain, the RSSILA seems to have acted mildly. Dr Mannix’s used words whose subtle meanings were hard to grasp and appeared raucous and crude when reported in the daily papers[145] ‘which  made him appear the vilest monster ever let loose on a Protestant Anglo Saxon community.’[146] The reaction of many non Catholic groups was very hostile and many wanted him deported. The RSSILA did not attack him personally and the only time it took a strong stand on the Irish situation, was when two railway's workers called the British soldiers murderers. They were expelled from the Railways and the RSSILA tried to prevent their re- instatement.[147] Even here the protest was against the two men stigmatizing the soldiers of the Empire and was not just directed at Irish Catholics. Many Catholics remained members of the RSSILA as shown by the attempted amendments to these motions.

The Catholic leaders strict banning of Catholics attending non Catholic Services made it hard for Catholics to attend Anzac Day services. They had to leave the march before the services stated. When the RSSILA finally banned all clergymen from the service, General Chauvel and White refused to lead the march as it was no longer Christian.[148]

The generals, did not understand the attitude of Catholics which reflected the widespread ignorance of other religions in this period. Even Monash never understood the deep grievance of the Irish Catholics and the deep divisions these caused in Australian society.[149] As a liberal in his own religion he did not understand the passion of the orthodox of other religions. To the generals their only passion was the army.

Chauvel had been appointed the first Chief of the General Staff in 1923 He was a patron of the RSSILA and as Inspector General made a series of reports on the armed services deploring the run down in defence spending. In this he was supported by the RSSILA which advocated increased defence spending. Chauvel justified his stance by saying ‘there was no likelihood of universal peace, we must be prepared for war and take training seriously.'[150]He was said to be a supporter of Herbert Brooks who was president of the Citizens Loyalist Committee which organized mass demonstrations against the Irish, the Catholic Church and the Labor Party.[151] Attempts to link Catholics, Irish and Labor as enemies reached their height with the formation of the White Army allegedly led by General  White. Although Cathcart believes it was led by General Blamey and other senior officers. He does believe that some RSSILA members were involved[152] but there is no evidence that the Victorian Executive supported any of these groups. None of the officers mentioned by Cathcart as leaders of the White Army were prominent in the RSSILA Victorian Branch.[153]They were located in the eastern suburbs of Melbourne so may had been involved in some sub branches but were not delegates to the Victorian Branch according to the minutes. Most of the members of the CMF mentioned by Garth Pratten as potential defenders of the community were born too late to be returned servicemen.[154] This view is reinforced by James Cayley in his article where he refers to the CMF as the nucleus around which the White Army was  formed.[155] Even if they came from public schools like Scotch as claimed by Pratten and Cathcart , they would only be active in a few Eastern suburbs sub branches. Very few of the leaders of the Victorian Branch of the RSSILA came from  exclusive schools like Scotch or Wesley.[156]

The events that critics claimed led to the consolidation of conservative power on the side of law and order was the Police Strike and its aftermath in November 1923.  Although there were signs of unrest in the police force from the political appointment of Alexander Nicholson  as  Police Commissioner in April 1922 few anticipated the strike or its effects. Nicholson was promoted from the ranks and had no war record, replacing Major General Sir John Gellibrand. The RSSILA made no statement about his appointment but there was a section of the Army and ex Servicemen who were opposed to his appointment. Some had not forgotten the police handling of soldier demonstrators in 1919.

When a small section of the Melbourne police went on strike on Friday night, on the eve of the Victorian Derby, mobs of looters rioted in the city reaching a crescendo on the Saturday night and Sunday Morning.[157] Melbourne was shocked by the violence and lawlessness. People attacked police, smashed windows of stores and stole their goods.  The remaining loyalist police were unable to gain control.

‘In the absence of police, tramway staff directed traffic in Elizabeth Street. Uniformed sailors, some under the weather, did likewise in other locations. Flushed with early success, the mob forced constables on point duty to retreat to the shelter of the Town Hall. The crowd taunted the police to come out.’[158]

Sir Harry Chauvel and other army chiefs appointed guards on defence establishments. However a request by the Premier for troops to play a more active role in preventing and putting down trouble was refused.[159]

The Victorian government called for volunteers including ex servicemen to act as Special Constables.  The RSSILA indicated support for the Victorian Government’s action.[160]’

'All Melbourne papers contended that the damage and looting was directly attributable to Melbourne’s criminal element, however after the rioters appeared in Court, it soon began apparent that most of the offenders were young men and boys without criminal histories.’[161]

To return order to Melbourne streets the state government turned to Monash. Within a day he had organized a 5000 strong Special Constabulary led by AIF veterans and CMF officers, that restored calm in the city with all the subtlety of a blow to the head. Andrew Moore has argued ‘that the “swiftness”; with which this group was assembled and the ruthless efficiency they displayed is evidence of counter-revolutionary planning.’ [162]

As the planning for this army was supposed to be secret it is hard to get evidence to disprove this point. However there is nothing in the behavior of Monash or the RSSILA, to indicate that they supported such secret armies. The Victorian Branch Minutes for this period do not even mention the police strike. The executive did know that there were ex- servicemen among the strikers and ‘two weeks after the strike, the president of the Returned Soldiers League publicly defended the returned men among the strikers against generalized Government claims that they were “absolutely devoid of moral fiber” pointing out that a considerable number had been decorated for gallantry.’[163]

Ex servicemen were on both sides in the strike. They went out on strike in slightly higher numbers than non returned police. They were thirty four percent of all strikers and fifty six percent of all ex servicemen in the force.[164] Despite the newspapers labeling the strike as a breakdown in law and order, the majority of ex servicemen police supported the strike.  The Herald published a special edition on Sunday Morning giving graphic accounts of the riots under headlines like ‘Over 50,000 pounds Damage in Last Nights Riots’ and ‘Bands of Hoodlums run Amok’[165] Next day under a cartoon entitled ‘The Rats Come Out’ they published a letter suggesting that special constables should be ex servicemen over 30 as the strikers were younger men.[166] By 6 November, the strike was not extending and Monash said it was all quiet for the Cup. The Herald also wrote an article about the men  trying to join the Special Constables. They were of all types from 18 to 70.At the time of the reporter’s visit, twenty three out of twenty five were AIF men. These included a digger, out of work, a clergyman, a squatter, a merchant, a painter, an oarsman and a League footballer.[167]

            The Age reports  seems to suggest that the returned soldiers were the  main supporters of law and order with headlines like ‘Ex Soldiers Dramatic Response’ under  a heading ‘Call for Specials’.[168]By the  Sunday, over 1,500 specials had been enrolled including two hundred returned servicemen many of whom had responded to appeals on Hoyts cinema screens.[169]The Victorian President ,Turnbull, was Managing Director of Hoyts.

Fifty-six percent of the  Specials had served in the great war but thirty seven percent of returned men who wanted to be Specials were rejected, some because of age.[170] They served under officers who included some leaders of the RSSILA  including Sergeant W.F. Blythe of Footscray but  these represented the Army and the CMF rather than the ex service association. Many men like Blythe were active in the CMF and Regular army as well as in the RSSILA .He had been promoted to Sergeant since the war. There has been some suggestion that an elite group in the CMF had been preparing for some break down in law and order like the Police strike. [171]Some have stated that the Specials continued in an undercover way as the White Army.[172]It is outside the scope of this paper to examine this issue but from the minutes and newspaper reports to 1923 ,there does not seem any strong RSSILA official support for the Specials after the initial crisis and even Monash withdrew as leader after a few weeks. However the actions of those ex servicemen who joined the Specials reinforced the legend that Australian soldiers stood for law and order in the community. Whenever there is a breakdown in law and order in Australia, newspapers are flooded with request to bring out the soldiers or even the ex servicemen.

An example was when Australians became alarmed at the number of illegal migrants arriving by ship the Navy was called out to  board the ships and deterred them from entering Australia. Letters ask that the army should be put in charge of detention camps.[173]

Chapter Four:  Guardians of the Anzac Legend

By 1923 the Anzac Legend was firmly established in Australia. While it had been born  in war it continued in peace as saying that Australians will do their duty willingly and without pressure. As the AIF was one of the few completely volunteer armies in the First World war it was unique. This has been linked to other volunteers besides soldiers so that firemen are now refer to as showing the Anzac spirit. Although the Anzacs were made into heroes they were made so in a collective sense not as individuals. Few individual Anzacs, even Generals, were honored.  Private Simpson and his donkey who rescued wounded soldiers from the battlefield is far better known as a symbol of the Anzac Spirit than even its leader General Monash. So much so that the reverse side of the Anzac Medal giving to all who served in the Anzac campaign, has a drawing of Simpson and his donkey. Yet Simpson was not even  Australian born.. His real name was John Simpson Kirkpatrick, a working class English  immigrant and a man of the left.[174] That he was used as a symbol of conservatism as well as bravery is due partly to the RSL guarding the legend from too close an examination. When an American magazine attacked the Australians at Gallipoli because of their misbehavior  in Egypt, a resolution was passed at the League’s congress in Adelaide condemning the article and referring it to the Australian and United States Governments.[175] Similar statements have made by the RSL when English and Australian historians have attacked the behavior of the Anzac soldiers in Egypt.

            Yet the RSL was aware that many of its members including it leaders were involved in this misbehavior. Its first President John Mc Kenzie was admitted to a venereal hospital in Cairo on 26 May 1915.[176] He had used his popularity with the soldiers to break up soldier riots in Melbourne in 1919. When an British Historian, Robert Rhodes James gave a public lecture in Melbourne in 1995, starting that  ‘In Egypt many of them (Australia soldiers) behaved badly and a number were sent home in disgrace as unfit for service’ he was condemned by the RSL.  Even the war historian and another guardian of the Anzac Legend C.W.Bean received death threats for unsparing reports of this aspect of part of the AIF he received death threats.[177] There are many records of soldiers sent home from. Egypt to face military courts for their criminal activities in Egypt.[178] It was more important for the RSL to emphasis how these men stood up for law and order at other stages of their careers then their indiscretions in Egypt.

The RSL was not the inventor of the Anzac Legend just its guardian. The inventor of the legend has been claimed to be either Ashmead Bartlett an English Journalist who wrote the first published dispatches at Gallipoli or C.W.Bean an Australian journalist who edited the first books on Anzac and was responsible for the National war memorial in Canberra. Both emphasis the bravery of the soldiers and their commitment to the tasks. [179] Ellis Ashmead-Barlett insisted that there ‘has been no finer feat in this war than this sudden landing in the dark’ [180]  Bean has been accused in both his public and private writings of struggling to show how the behavior of the Australian soldier fitted his ideal.[181] This meant that his heroes were all bush men with some appreciation of Greek Legends. This is shown by his editing of the Anzac book which is supposed to be a cross section of soldiers contributions, but there is no reference to the Australian city life although most of the soldiers came from the cities. L.L Robson has shown that Bean completely disregarded urban life and values because of his emphasis on the rural origin of the AIF. Those engaged in primary production formed only a small part of the AIF.[182] In the Anzac Book there are frequent references to Greek legends in which most of the soldiers had little knowledge.

The RSL continued these distortions in its guarding of the legend. It also emphasis the rural origins with many sub branches in rural areas and the exaggerated comparison with Greek heroes. However it has allowed some modification of the legend over time. Politicians as early as W.Hughes in 1916 have used the Anzac  Anniversaries to advance their causes. Hughes used the first anniversary advocate conscription and a recent Prime Minister Keating has used the anniversary to support a republic. Neither cause seems to be in line with the Anzac Legend.

Even its enemies admit that the RSL emerged as the official custodian of the Anzac tradition.[183] It has a copyrighted on the name “Anzac” and any attempt to misused the name is opposed often leading to legal action. The RSL has shown it is the true Guardian of the Anzac legend.

Even today the RSL used the Anzac legend to good effect to gain benefits for ex servicemen far superior to similar benefits in most countries of the world.

For example Australian veterans over 70 who served overseas and pass a means test receive a Gold Card giving free travel on all public transport. All gain medical benefits in excess of the rest of the population. They have their own hospital in each state.  Even preference in employment still applies to ex servicemen in the Victorian Public service and several private companies. This applies not just to the original Anzacs but also to veterans of World War Two, Korea and Vietnam.

In guarding the Anzac legend the State President of the Victorian Branch of the RSL, B,C Ruxton like his predecessors has become a spokesman for law and order and old values such as respect for the royal family. He can claim that the benefits to ex servicemen are far in advance of most other countries.[184]  He also can attack anyone like the former Prime Minister Keating for making rude remarks about the Royal family.[185]

It is this linking of the Anzac Legend with conservative causes that has made its critics regard the RSL as dangerous. However this may reflect the age of the leaders and its members rather than a belief that the RSL has usurp the legend. While most young people in Australia are Republicans they still attend Anzac services in growing numbers. The Anzac legend has united rather than divided the country. Therefore it could be argued that the RSL did guard the Anzac Legend so that each new generation could still find it of value.

Conclusion

From its origins to the end of 1923, the Victorian Branch of the RSSILA  was divided by  forces of the right and left trying to gain control.  At the start the leaders were strong supporters of law and order and the causes of imperialism and nationalism for which their members had fought.  However they also were passionate fighters for soldiers’ rights.  This made them support such schemes as the Co-operative Anzac tweed industry. Their early platform advocated co-operation by which wage earners would participate in the profits either in whole or part from their labour.[186] However the platform also advocated a preference to returned men over other workers. This brought them into conflict with other workers. They also fought for repatriation benefits to returned men unique in the British world. This brought them into conflict with Federal Governments most of whom were conservative in this period.

The Victorian Branch had suggested some  radical actions in making demands on governments  but generally tried to keep to the middle ground. Although they initially supported radical protests in 1919 they backed away when these demonstrations got out of hand. 

            Both Bolton and Dyett, while Federal Presidents, had fights with the government because they were trying to get more benefits for their members above that offered by the government. According to Kristianson , the Prime Minister’s relations with Dyett were never very cordial….[187] Even the Victorian Executive supported more radical policies such as cash gratuity offered by the Labor party.  Turnbull, while acting as Federal President, was accused by the Conservative Prime Minister Bruce of casting a ‘slur on the honour and good faith of every member of the Commonwealth Government’[188] this was despite Turnbull’s  later support for Bruce through his involvement in the All for Australia league He did not seem to use his conservative leanings to  influence his dealings with government on behalf of returned soldiers.

There were no wholesale dismissals of radicals in 1919 although some radical leaders like Burkett become more supportive of law and order.  If this  support can be called taking soldiers off the streets, as claimed by Thomson, it was directed not at destroying class loyalties but in maintaining law and order and the reputation  of the soldiers.

The RSL leadership during this period tried to be non political so was against class divisions. Attempts to be more democratic than the army were made with rank not being mentioned at meetings.  Officers were requested to take control sometimes as in General Brand’s parade after the protests of 1919 got out of hand.  However generally the rank of an officer was not mentioned in the minutes of meetings.  The federal leadership consisted mostly of commissioned Officers but  there were not enough commissioned officers to lead all State branches.  Victoria’s President after 1921 was  a lieutenant colonel but other office bearers were usually junior officers. Three of the early Presidents, Mc Kenzie, Palmer and Martin were non commissioned  officers. Martin and Turnbull were young men under thirty years when appointed. The first Secretary, Murray, was a private.

There was plenty of conflict in the Victorian Branch even after 1919. Burkett was invited to discuss the Engineers strike in 1920.[189] In most debates there was a lot of criticism of office bearers. Palmer, Martin and Turnbull were all subject to embarrassing remarks.

The fact that these debates were reported in full seems to indicate that the executive was not firmly in control. Also complaints from sub branches were acknowledged. This does not seem to indicate that the Executive was out of touch with the rank and file.

As the sub Branches were based on location many of them had few officers.  While there were some like Hawthorn with many officers, others like Footscray and Essendon had few officers.  The Footscray secretary was able to criticized the police over the riots of 1919. Members of the very successful Essendon branch were able to attack militarism. As Sergent Major Mullins, the President, said ‘there was room for all except the disloyal. They did not recognize creed or political opinion’.[190]

The Richmond and Preston sub branches attacked attempts to create an officers’ caste.[191] It is true that Thomson has showed that the Brunswick sub branch was dominated by business groups hostile to Labor. But this was one of the branches that was forced to close through lack of support. The successful sub branches tried to attract a broad support by being non political or sectarian.

Attacks by Thomson and Lake are partly correct in saying that the sub branches got the soldiers off the streets. It is also correct that such schemes as the Anzac tweed industry did not continue in the 1920s. However such schemes with their soviet type co-operatives did not continue anywhere in Australia in the 1920s. The community had become more conservative after the Communist revolution and the Easter Rebellion.  There is little indication that the RSL was more conservative than the general community.

Cathcart states that the militancy of the diggers were uses as guardians of Empire and Capital. While there is some talk of secret armies the minutes reveal that  when the Victorian Executive was asked to give support to Loyalty movements it refused requests from the Sydney State Secretary and a solicitor, Mr Hunt.[192]

The Federal President also took a cautious stand. As a Catholic and a friend of John Wren he was not prepared to join in attacks on Dr Mannix or the St Patrick’s Day march.  The Victorian Executive only condemned soldiers appearing to use their name to support Dr Mannix.  The only major demonstrations of soldiers in this period was the Guard Of Honour by Catholic V C winners to Dr Mannix in the 1920 St Patrick’s Day Procession.

There is little evidence of soldiers being used to support Capital and Empire until the 1923 Police Strike. Even here the action of the Special Constables was to restore law and order not to break the strike. There were the same percentage of returned soldiers among the strikers as among the special constables. The Victorian Executive asked for lenient action against the strikers. Monash refused to continue as the leader of the special constables or any similar group after the police strike.

It is true as stated by Sekules and Rees in the official history of the RSL ,Lest We Forget ,that the views of the League have been reasonably in accord with the views of the rest of the Australian community. During the period 1919 to 1923 the Victorian community did become more conservative.  The soldier’s organization reflected community opinion in this regard as many people were scared of Communist and other protest movements would take place here. While the RSL was one of the first to ban Communists, I agree with Seckuless that this was not far ahead of the rest of the community.

It may be true that soldiers were divisive in demanding special privileges. Their demands for preference in employment may had offended the union movement but their demands for repatriation benefits made them unpopular with the Federal Government. The cautious approaches of Dyett, eventually endorsed by the Victorian Executive, yielded benefits from both Conservative and Labor Governments.

Sekules and Reeves point out that Dyett was a consummate political operator who steered the organization through the  eight years of internecine discord. He had a close connection with John Wren and was also close to the conservative parties. In this way he was able to gain  concessions from both sides of politics.[193]Kristianson states that the 1920s had seen the progressive emergence within the League of two conflicting views about pressure groups, strategy and tactics and the decade ended with the Federal President firmly maintaining his methods were the most effective  and dominating the affairs of the League to ensure their use.[194]

Although the cautious views of Captain Dyett did prevail at the end, there seems to have been no fundamental reversal of the policy of Turnbull and the Victorian Branch. The dispute between Turnbull and Dyett was about tactics rather than about the philosophy of the RSL. Dyett supported Turnbull when it was expedient in opposing Hughes. He was aware that Turnbull wanted to replace him with Monash.  Dyett seems to have blamed Turnbull for the financial problems of the Branch forcing him to stand down as President in 1924.  There is no indication that the Victorian Branch was more conservative than its members. Except for Turnbull, the  leaders were mainly junior officers who tried to keep to the middle.  The leaders tried to keep away from extremists of the right or left. Although there were serious divisions the Minutes of the Branch meetings indicated that the meetings were conducted in a democratic manner. Delegates’ views were reported even when they opposed the Executive.  Complaints from sub Branches were reported. Some attempt was made to attend to them although some complaints  such as about military police being  admitted could not be answered without breaking the constitution. Generally the branch did not interfere with the sub branches as long as they acted within the rules of the League.

This may have left some branches to act in a non democratic way as Thomson  alleges with Brunswick. However the differences in sub branches enabled Percy Bird to change branches when Military Police joined Footscray.  Generally the more successful branches such as Footscray and Esssendon represented a broad cross section of the community and did not discriminate over religion or politics.

Working- class solidarity was not destroyed during this period. Although the demand for preference in employment for returned soldiers did go against union policies ,many members and even delegates were union members. Union membership was very high particularly in 1919. While strikes and protest actions lessened after 1919 this reflected changes in the general community rather than RSL policy. The Australian community became more conservative as fear of Communism grew in the 1920s.

The policy of the RSL reflected these changes with less emphasis on co-operatives and more opposition to Soviet policies.

There was not a conservative take over of the Victorian Branch in 1919. Radicals like Captain Burkett were still delegates and spoke on industrial matters.  They were very active in their sub Branches.  At all stages to 1923 at least the minutes revealed divisions in debates over most issues. No leader was safe from criticism. All Presidents were criticized and in some cases disciplined by other members. Martin, Palmer and Turnbull all lost positions because of actions of other delegates or the Federal leadership.  

The Victorian Branch at least remained non party political or sectarian. It did not officially  support any political party and tried to keep out of party politics.

If some sub branches were involved in local elections this seems to have been done without the support of the Victorian Branch. They would not even allow Anzac House to be used by political or religious groups. When such groups claimed to represent returned soldiers the branch was quick to disassociate themselves from these claims. It is impossible to know if any members belong to secret political groups but no leader of the RSL in Victoria publicly endorsed such groups.

There was no dominant figure in the Victorian Branch during this period. While Turnbull was president for the longest period he was not free to impose his will. Former presidents such as Martin and Mc Kenzie were still delegates and his secretary David had been secretary since 1917 except for a small break in 1919-20. As  the branch was losing members and had financial problems it could not afford to antagonize any ex serviceman.

As has been stated sub branches represented the members in various locations.  To keep members they generally had to reflect the needs of their members.  Even if businessmen were elected to office they still had to get the support of the community to be effected.  This is why the Footscray Branch successfully campaigned for amenities such as billiard parlor for its members in opposition to churches and councils. While its nominal head was a doctor most of the work was performed by its Secretary who started off as a private.  The equally successful Essendon branch was lead by a Sergeant Major and was able to attack militarism and support such groups as the Liberty League to oppose prohibition.

Other sub branches might be dominated by business groups but this often reflected the community. Where they became too political like Brunswick, they often lost members. Generally the Victorian Branch and most sub branches were not partisan towards governments.  They had to negotiate to get benefits from all levels of government even municipal councils.

The Victorian branch was involved in  trying to get benefits for its members from Federal and State Governments.  Although most of the negotiation was done at the Federal level, the Victorian branch was represented on many committees. Turnbull was acting Federal President at one stage. He advocated a tougher stand than did his Federal counterpart but in the end had to accept Federal leadership.  At the local level the Victorian Branch negotiated with State Government departments about things like preference in employment for ex- servicemen. They were successful to some degree but not as successful as in the Federal Public Service.  The lower down the level of government the more difficult it was to bargain. While local sub Branches agitated with councils for employment of ex servicemen it was often hard to replace a non returned soldier workers who had the support of the local community.  Councils were often scared of  young soldiers getting out of hand so in some cases, as in Footscray, needed assurance from the Fathers Association they would keep control before they granted a  request, such as in this case for a license for the Billiard Hall.

The RSL was sometimes in conflict with unions over preference for ex servicemen.  But when there were ex servicemen  on strike such as in the Police Force they tried to help their members regardless of union affiliation. RSL leaders like Burkett were active in supporting unions. Other leaders might be anti union but generally after 1919 the RSL took a non partisan stand in industrial disputes.

An example of this is their divided role in the Police Strike. Although many ex servicemen enrolled as Special Constables, the RSL leadership did not attack the strikers. They supported the Special Constables but also asked for reinstatement for ex servicemen strikers. At least to the end of 1923 the Victorian Branch of the RSSILA was impartial in their support of returned soldiers.