pdf download - Westerly Magazine

Gordon Stephenson, Mrs Ray Oldham of theHistorical Society, and Mr Hew Roberts of theNational Trust, but again The West Australianfound little satisfaction in the case for preservation—"Professor Gordon Stephenson was clearlythe winner .... there is no convincingreason why the Barracks should stay. Theyhave little architectural merit and their onlyhistorical significance is that they were builtto house pensioners who guarded convicts."^In October 1961, came the establishment ofthe Barracks Defence Council. This body drewits representatives from eight community institutionsand could claim widespread communitysupport. Representatives came from—The National TrustThe Royal W.A. Historical SocietyThe Women's Service GuildThe National Council of WomenThe Victoria LeagueThe Tree SocietyThe Fellowship of Australian WritersThe Citizens Committee for the Preservationof King's Parkand, upon its creation, Council members immediatelybegan distributing leaflets in defenceof the Barracks.Action was one thing, but public esteem wasanother, and in November 1961 the BarracksDefence Council at its second meeting soughtto establish the latter. It appointed the Rt.Reverend C. L. Riley (one time Bishop ofBendigo) to be its president, and from thatpoint it became an impressive fighting forcewith its prestigious leader and a politicallysignificant following.If 1961 was the formative year for the organisationof the defence of the Barracks, then1962 was the year for giving the case legitimacy.John Betjeman visited Perth in December1961, and being a specialist on Victorian architecturehis views on the Barracks were eagerlysought. The Barracks Defence Council was notdisappointed. "The buildings were [built] by agreat and courageous people" said Betjeman inrecognition of the convict labour that helpedtheir construction. They "had the texture oftime and had to be saved". "Otherwise", hepredicted, "they would make way for moreservice stations".^"Moreover, Betjeman persuaded Lord Euston(Chairman of the Society for the Protection ofAncient Buildings, London) not to miss seeing"Perth's beautiful Gothic revival brickwork"on his Australian visit early in 1962. ButHuston's comments were guarded. He wroteto The West Australian:"Speaking from the view point of a visitorwith no previous knowledge of this city, Ishould like to express the hope that at leastthe towers and archway of the Old Barrackswill be preserved.""They seemed to me to create a most valuablefocal point at the end of St. George's Terrace,the removal of which would surely beregretted in years to come"."Then in May 1962, Perth received the visitof Dr Raynor Banham (Architectural Historian,Critic, and Joint Editor of Britain'sArchitectural Review), and Barracks defenderswere pleased to have him reported (18.5.62)as claiming that:"The old Barracks reduced the otherwise unlimitedview and [they] keep the street spacetidy".i2Fortified with this support from overseascelebrities, the Barracks Defence Council in1963 turned to the technique of public petitionin order to impress the political masters. Some3,000 people signed-up as advocates for theretention of the building and, in July, theircollective opinion was presented to the government.But the impact was minimal. It seemedthat the final decision had been taken, andthe weight of 3,000 signatures was not enoughto affect the balance. At this point the Barracksissue lost its momentum in public discussion.On the whole the years 1963-65 were yearsof relative calm on the part of the defenders.For the Barracks Defence Council it was aperiod for the resolution of its own inner conflictsabout tactics. There were proposals thatthe front of the Barracks (including the mainarchway) could be kept as a historicalmuseum; and there was an increasing recognitionof the difficulties of preserving thewhole building in the face of the extensivescale of the road works to be undertaken inthe area.In March 1963, after a conference with theBarracks Defence Council, Premier Brand announcedthat the Council's claims, "for theretention of the wings had been rejected asimpracticable"; and he asserted that, "the onlypart which could possibly be retained is thearchway". It was also reported that the BarracksDefence Council had "accepted thisfact".i3 Then, on 9th April the Premier announcedthe Government's plan:"we felt the fairest way to decide would beto let it stand after the wings are gone sothat the Government and public can forma final opinion".'*WESTERLY, No. 1 of 1967 55