Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade

n.d.

UNOCCUPIED ISLANDS IN THE VICINITY OF AUSTRALIA

1. Until recently the question of the ownership of the small
islands lying off the coast of Australia has not been of any great
significance to the Commonwealth.
A number of factors have, however, arisen during the past few
years which have lent significance to the fact that certain small
islands and reefs which lie at a distance of about 300 miles from
the Queensland coast are virtually not annexed, or at least, might
be subject to disputed ownership.
These factors may be summarised as follows:-
(a) The activities of the Japanese along the coasts of Queensland,
the Great Barrier Reef, Papua, New Guinea, the Gilbert and Ellice
Islands, the Solomon Islands, the New Hebrides and generally
amongst the whole of the Western Pacific Islands, the North coasts
of Australia and the Dutch East Indies. This penetration has been
a source of great uneasiness in turn to the Netherlands East
Indies, the Philippines, and now the Commonwealth authorities.
Unless the Commonwealth or a State Government has effective
control of all islands in the vicinity of Australia, which may be
used as bases and sources of fuel and water supply, the problem of
poaching in Australian Territorial waters may not be effectively
dealt with.

(b) The announcement that the Japanese intend to extend trawling
activities on a large scale in Australian waters, or waters
hitherto regarded as Australian waters, though actually outside
the three mile territorial limit.

(c) In 1933 the French annexed Spratley Island, about 250 miles
from the North-West coast of Borneo, and also certain islands in
the South China Sea between French Indo-China and the Philippines.
In I934 Captain de Hisschop announced that he had discovered an
unknown island to the North of Australia, and that he had claimed
it for France. The island was, however, found to be non-existent.
These actions are indicative of the present interest being
displayed by the French in regard to all unoccupied Pacific
islands, wherever situated.

(d) The demands by certain powers for colonial territory, and in
the case of Germany, for the return of colonies, which have caused
increased international interest in the colonial question with a
tendency to examine all unoccupied or unannexed islands, even
those having no possible present value.

(e) The American activity on small islands in the Pacific in
connection with the development of Trans-Pacific air Services.
Particular reference is made to the reported annexation of the
Howland, Baker and Jarvis Islands, two of which are regarded as
being British.

(f) The development of the submarine arm, especially its radius of
action and naval effectiveness, gives outlying islands, at present
without value, a distinct potential value.

(g) The initiation and development of trans-oceanic air services
make even the smallest and most economically worthless islands,
provided they are favourably situated, geographically, of great
importance.

2. The whole of this question came under review when a wireless
station was erected in 1922 on Willis Island, one of the islands
in the Coral Sea. A memorandum on the question, prepared by the
Department at that time, stated: -

'According to a telegram dated 19/10/1921 from the Secretary of
State ... there does not seem to have been a quite satisfactory
act of annexation of all these islets and reefs. They are deemed
to be British possessions in virtue of Captain Cook's annexation
of the east coast of Australia and the off-lying islands on 22nd
August, 1770; and on one or two of them, the British Flag has
since been hoisted. Some of them, according to the Australia
Directory, Vol. 1, have been in occasional occupation, and Willis
island has recently been occupied by the Commonwealth Government;
others have not been occupied; but it is to be presumed that no
other country is likely to lay claim to any of them . . .'

It was suggested that it would be well that these islets and reefs
should be brought under the control of the Commonwealth. Nothing
further was done until 1929 when the question was again examined
in London, and also by the Commonwealth Department of Defence. The
Admiralty Office, London, reported that Hunter and Matthew Islands
were unclaimed by any nation, and the Defence Department stated
that these two islands, while not of any value from a purely
defensive point of view, 'are on the air route Sydney-Norfolk
Island-Fiji, and might be of use as emergency landing grounds in
connection with the development of air routes across the Pacific'.
It was also pointed out that these islands are within the limits
of the New Zealand Naval Station. The Admiralty Office later
advised that Mellish Reef was, as far as was known, unclaimed, but
that a British claim to it would be on a sound footing.
Nothing more was done until 1933 when, in response to a request by
Mr Latham, the then Minister for External Affairs, the Defence
Department reported that there were no islands on the Australian
Naval Station as to which sovereignty was doubtful. (The Eastern
limit of the Australian Naval Station is 170( East longitude). In
reply to a further inquiry the Defence Department wrote that an
examination of Admiralty Charts and Sailing Directions had been
made, and had confirmed the position that there are certain islets
and reefs in the Coral Sea which are British possessions but not
part of the Commonwealth. In addition Middleton and Elizabeth
Reefs were shown as British Dependencies of New South Wales, while
Hunter and Matthew Islands and Mellish Reef were not shown in the
possession of any nation.
The matter was then referred to the External Affairs Officer,
London, in September 1934, and he was requested to take up the
matter with a competent authority such as the Hydrographic Branch
of the Admiralty, with a view to obtaining an opinion as to
whether it would be advisable to take any further action in regard
to these unclaimed islands and reefs. No reply has since been
received.
3. A further examination of the question has been made in the
External Affairs Department and shows that the boundary of the
State of Queensland is the outer edge of the Barrier Reef, or 60
miles from the mainland, whichever is the farther, while the
jurisdiction of New South Wales over the area to the Eastward of
that line appears to have been removed in 1859. The only other
authority with power to take steps to exercise British
jurisdiction over this area is the High Commissioner for the
Western Pacific, by virtue of the Order-in-Council of 1893, which
defined the limits of his jurisdiction, but no steps have ever
been taken by the High Commissioner to render the British
Sovereignty over those islands effective, nor is there any present
indication that he will do so. The sovereignty of these islands is
a matter which is of primary importance to Australia, and
consequently it is felt that action should be initiated by the
Commonwealth Government to ensure that they become clearly
recognised as British territory.
4. They can, moreover, be brought under Australian control with
little difficulty. As all but three of the islands can
legitimately be claimed as British, all that is required to bring
them under Australian control, is for action to be taken to have
an Order-in-Council made under the Colonial Boundaries Act placing
the islands under the control of the Government of the
Commonwealth, or of the Government of Queensland. This Order-in-
Council would come into operation after the necessary legislation
accepting the territory had been passed by the Government
concerned.
5. Should the territory be accepted by the Commonwealth
Government, provision could then be made either for its
administration by the Commonwealth or legislation could be passed
providing for its control by Ordinances made by the Government of
Queensland.
6. To ensure that no islands are overlooked in the extension of
the boundary, the Order-in-Council and the Act should be so worded
as to define the boundaries of the area within which all the
islands and territories are to be included as:-

'Commencing at the North-Eastern corner of the boundary of Papua,
on the East by a line drawn to the intersection of the 12th
Parallel of South latitude with the 158th Meridian of East
longitude, (to take in Pocklington Reef) then along that Meridian
to the latitude of Point Danger, on the South by that latitude, on
the West by the Eastern boundary of the State of Queensland (i.e.,
the Barrier Reef, or 60 miles from the coast of Queensland,
whichever lies at the greatest distance from the coast), and on
the North by the Southern and Eastern boundaries of Papua.'

7. Middleton Reef and Elizabeth Reef could either be brought
within the same jurisdiction by specific reference, or if desired,
these islands could be placed under the control of the State of
New South Wales. 8. Matthew and Hunter Islands, coming within the
New Zealand Naval Station, approximately 1,500 miles distant from
Australia, and with the French Dependency of New Caledonia lying
between them and Australia, might appropriately be taken over by
the Government of New Zealand, or alternatively by the Government
of Fiji. Their sovereignty is definitely a matter of Australian
national interest, and it is most desirable that they should be
British. [1]