Billy_Hughes

Billy Hughes changed Australia forever and divided the country over a variety of different topics including conscription, politics, World War I, and the economy. Billy Hughes tried on two occasions, both unsuccessfully, to introduce conscription; it was a hard fought battle by both sides. Australia changed immensely under the War Precautions Act that Billy Hughes put into place. The conscription debate caused a split of the Labor party which was a huge backlash against Hughes; so he formed and led the National Party of Australia which consisted of half of the previous Labor government and Liberal members. The economy was hugely altered with many people unable to get work however many new companies were able to prosper with the lack of competition. World War I affected Australia significantly with over sixty thousand deaths and one hundred and fifty six thousand wounded or taken prisoner. Thus society was split during the era of Billy Hughes. Australia was completely divided over the issue of conscription; many agreed with the war effort however many also disagreed with the idea of compulsory armed service. Prime Minister Billy Hughes defied his own party which contained several influential unionists and religious figures that disagreed with conscription. One was Daniel Mannix the Archbishop of Melbourne who claimed World War I was, "just a sordid trade war" . Mannix fought extremely hard against conscription, leading an anti-conscription campaign against Billy Hughes. This caused a huge backlash against Prime Minister Hughes, which led to the first conscription plebiscite result, a narrow loss of 1.69%. After the first loss Hughes did not give up on the debate of conscription, but he was expelled from the Labor Party. After his expulsion, he joined the Nationalist Party of Australia of which he became the leader of Australia again on 5 May 1917, with a large victory of 31 seats over Labor. The conscription debate spread to all areas of society with even the ANZAC’s on the frontline split over conscription. Red Apple states, “ANZAC’s who had fought strongly agreed with conscription because they knew that more reinforcements were needed on the battlefields however, other ANZACs who held the contrasting opinion that no one should be forced to endure what they had experienced.” This source shows the division amongst the ANZACs and how they represented the rest of society in being split over their opinion of conscription. Macintyre however argues, “The principal opposition came from socialists, radicals and feminists of whom challenged the assumption of a unified national interest in war and supposed equality of sacrifice embodied in military conscription.” Pelham claimed, “Australia alone fought the war without recourse to conscription but the price was a bitterness and division that continued to mark the social fabric long after the war ended.” This source shows how spread and long the battle of conscription was, and how it socially split Australia. Hughes decided to hold a second plebiscite despite having majority in both the House of Representatives and the senate meaning he did not need to hold a plebiscite to enforce conscription, however it lost again although was hard fought again. Consequently Australia was separated over the debate of conscription that had also split the Labor party. Australia was cut into two by Billy Hughes after he was expelled from the Labor party. The debate over conscription literally split society as well as the Labor party. Billy Hughes’ debate over conscription got so heated that people in his own party expelled him after the loss of the first conscription plebiscite. The reason he was expelled from the Labor party was because many significant leaders that were heavily involved or supporters of the Labor party disagreed with conscription. Billy Hughes labelled the Labor party members who expelled him as “traitors to him and all men who were fighting on the frontline.” Billy Hughes then decided to join the Nationalist Party of Australia and he went on to become the Prime Minister and head of the party despite more liberal than Labor in the newly formed party. Another large political issue surrounding Billy Hughes was the War Precautions Act. The War Precautions Act gave the government more power than they could have imagined or hoped for allowing them to do things such as, control income taxes (previously held by the states), creating loans for war, censoring of letters and publications. The War Precautions Act was used extensively by Billy Hughes during his rule. He even used the power on one occasion against the Queensland state premier by “seizing copies of an anti-conscription speech that had been censored from publication in Hansard.” Many people were angered by the over censorship by the government during World War I and the amount of power it gained and never relinquished from the act. People were so angered at one point that Macintyre claimed, “he carried his own revolver.” Hence showing Australia was divided over the Labor Party split and the War Precautions Act which gave the government more power than they had previously. Billy Hughes had the difficult job of leading the country through one of our darkest stages in history; World War I. He angered many people by committing extensively to World War I. Billy Hughes spent 700 million pounds on World War I; this was mainly from war loans in London. He also dedicated, “out of a population of five million, 331000 soldiers. Of those who served abroad, two out of every three were killed or wounded.” These figures show how immeasurably the population was affected just militarily. The men who fought in the war, fought through many hardships and in horrible conditions such as mud and torrential rain. Many men suffered from “monotonous food, insufficient sleep and life on the battlefield.” However despite these atrocious debts and loss of men, many historians claimed that Australia was born in Gallipoli and on the frontline through the mateship and courage of the Anzacs. For the first time Australians were proud to be Australian not British. Freeman claimed that, “the price of nationhood must be paid in blood and tears” This shows how he believed that the deaths of the Anzac’s were not in vain, that they led to Australia becoming more united when they most needed it during the war and society’s split. However society had grown war weary and began to disagree with the war as stated, “War-weariness was everywhere, especially among working people.” The average Australian began to tire of the loss and suffering faced from World War I. In 1917 Labor party branches around Australia blamed the capitalist economic system for the war and demanded a negotiated peace this led to the largest strike in Australian history with railway, tramway, truck drivers, miners, wharf labourers and seamen all taking part. This shows how frustrated and fed up Australians were with the losses of men in the war. It showed the anger towards the government and civil disorder now beginning to erupt in Australian society unlike any other before. Thus showing Billy Hughes leadership during World War I was very divisive and created the Anzac legend however created the largest strike in Australian history. The economic toll of World War I was one of the biggest and most influential aspects of Billy Hughes’s time in power. Australia during World War I locally gained many contracts that were usually given to overseas companies (who were now at war) however lost exports due to the lost trading opportunities. Australia lost 30% of all exports due to the war from German, French and Belgian markets. The economy contracted a large 10% during the first year of World War I. Unemployment increased as a result of the contraction in the economy. The average income began to fall below the average cost of living; many people were being angered by this. However Billy Hughes refused to make a referendum on the controlling of prices; this angered the Labor movement who were calling for a referendum. On the other hand Anzacday claimed that “By the end of the war more than 400 products were being produced in Australia which had not been produced here before the war.” This source shows how many new companies such as BHP and Nicholas were able to begin and prosper. This shows Australia did not suffer as heavily as many claimed. The war was able to “provide a form of protection to Australian industries” . This protection was made through the war as no one was willing to trade with Austria and Germany allowing Australian companies to make products once dominated by Austria and Germany. The reason behind Australia’s strong position according to Johnson was our industry and steel works. Thus showing Australia was hugely affected economically through Billy Hughes’s war loans and outright refusal to take a referendum on price fixing. Former Prime Minister Billy Hughes was extremely controversial and divisive. He split the Australian nation in half over many different issues. Hughes split the Labor party into two; the Nationalist Party of Australia and the Labor Party. The political split was due to the heavily contested debate of conscription. Australia was divided over conscription with religious leaders, Union bosses and Political leaders all having separate opinions. In regards to the military, Australia was led by Billy Hughes during World War I. This war garnered a lot of anger because of the public’s belief that the war was not Australia’s to fight however were unified like never before from the Anzac legend. Australia was then again split as many big companies were able prosper from World War I because of the lack of competition. On the other hand, many people lacked food and suffered under war profiteering. These issues contributed to the controversy surrounding Billy Hughes’ ideals.