HISTORY A Garden to Commemorate Federation Geelong’s 21st Century Garden A Small Landscape with Great Meaning C.F. Newman Adelaide Nurseryman Jimhour House, Queensland AUSTRALIAN GARDEN HISTORY SOCIETY Mission The Australian Garden History Society will be the leader in concern for and conservation of significant cultural landscapes and gardens through committed, relevant and sustainable action. Publication Australian Garden History, the official journal of the Australian Garden History Society, is published six times a year. Enquiries Toll Free 1800 678 446 Phone (03) 9650 5043 Fax (03) 9650 8470 E-mail info@gardenhistorysociety.org.au Web-site www.gardenhistorysocicty.org.au AGHS Office Gate Lodge, 100 Birdwood Avenue, Melbourne, 3004 Postal Address As above Subscriptions (GST inclusive) For 1 year Single $48 Family $63 Corporate $75 Youth $20 (under 25 years of age) Advertising Rates 1/8 page $132 (2+issues $121 each) 1/4 page $220 (2+ issues $198 each) 1/2 page $330 (2+ Issues $275 each) Full page $550 (2+ issues $495 each) Inserts $440 for Australia-wide mailing Pro-rata for state-wide mailing Editor Nina Crone, 15 Acacia Road, Promontory'Views,Vic. 3959 Phone: (03) 5663 2381 E-mail: ncrone@dcsi.net.au Design Jo Waite Design Printing FRP ISSN 1033-3673 Front Cover Jimbour House, Dalby in Queensland. Photo: Gloria Cumming In the garden at Kuranui, Liz Dexter (Vic.) looks on as Captain Gunn explains a 'kissing gate' to Joan Young (Vic.). Admiring the garden at Ashfieid, Margaret and Max Bourke (ACT), Fran Paul, Helen Page and Mai Faul (Vic.). Victor Crittenden (ACT) and Caroline Simpson (NSW) enjoy conversation in the garden at Ashfieid. Sadly Caroline died in January and an obituary will appear in the next issue of the journal. Rain is no deterrent at Pigeon Hill as Fairie Nielsen (Tas.) explains her gully planting to Beverley Joyce and Robert Read (Vic). Malcolm Wilson (NSW) and Richard Heathcote (Vic.) rest on their walk at Windgrove Peace Garden. Copyright ©Australian Garden History Society 2003. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form for commercial purposes wholly or in part (other than circumstances outlined in any agreement between the author/artist/photographer/ illustrator and the Society) without prior written permission of the publisher. Permission may be granted subject to an acknowledgment being made. Copying for private and educational purposes is permitted provided acknowledgment is made in any report, thesis or other document which has used information contained in this publication. 2 Australian Garden History Vol 14 No 4January/February 2003 CONTENTS NEW DESIGNS FOR OLD GARDENS 4 A Garden to Commemorate the Centenary of Federation Robert Griffin writes of the competition for a new garden at Sydney’s Government House. Geelong’s 21st Century Gardens John Arnott provides details about the renewal of Geelong’s Botanic Gardens. S'/ A Small Landscape with Great Meaning Torquil Canning discusses memorial gardens in relation to the Port Arthur Historic Site. *4 C. F. Newman and Sons - Adelaide Nurserymen Cas Middlemis follows the changing fortunes of a hardworking South Australian family. rtf Jimbour House Gloria Cumming introduces the garden of an old Queensland pastoral property. £rt For the Bookshelf Paul Fox reviews The Oxford Companion to Australian Gardens edited by Richard Aitken and Michael Looker and Trevor Nottle recommends Rooted in History - Studies in Garden Conservation. The 23rd Annual Conference in Hobart John Taylor sums up the lecture program and Nina Crone records the garden visits. Items of Interest Tfz Diary Dates On Tour Nina Crone finds some noteworthy gardens in northern Tasmania during the post-conference tour. National Management Committee Patron Margaret Darling Chairman Peter Watts Vice-Chairman Richard Hcathcote Treasurer Elizabeth Walker Secretary Helen Page Executive Officer Jackie Courmadias Elected Members Max Bourke ACT Stuart Read NSW LeeTregloanVIC Dianne Wilkins SA Malcolm Wilson NSW State Representative Gabriellc Tryon ACT Kate Madden NSW Glenn Cooke QLD Wendy Joyner SA Helen PageVIC Deidre Pearson TAS AnneWillox WA Branch Contacts ACT/Monaro/Riverina Branch Gabrielle Tryon 4 Anstey Street Pearce ACT 2607 Ph: (02) 6286 4585 E-mail: gmtryon@netspeed.com.au Queensland Branch Glenn Cooke PO Box 4572 West End QLD 4101 Ph: (07) 3846 1050 E-mail: gletm. cooke@qag.qld. gov.au South Australian Branch Di Wilkins 39 Elizabeth Street Eastwood SA 5068 Ph: (08) 8272 9381 Southern Highlands Branch Chris Webb PO Box 707 Moss Vale NSW 2577 Ph: (02) 4861 4899 E-mail: cwebb@cwcbb.com.au Sydney & Northern NSW Branch Malcolm Wilson 10 Hartley Street Rozelle NSW 2039 Ph: (02) 9810 7803 Tasmanian Branch Deidre Pearson 15 Ellington Road Sandy Bay TAS 7005 Ph: (03) 6225 3084 Victorian Branch Helen Page c/- AGHS.Gate Lodge 100 Birdwood Avenue Melbourne VIC 3004 Ph/Fx: (03) 9650 5043 E-mail: helenpage@bigpond.com Western Australian Branch Edith Young 21A Corbel Street Shelley WA 6148 Ph: (08) 9457 4956 E-mail: young_ee47@hotmail.com Editorial Advisory Panel Convener Anne Latreille Members Richard Aitken Max Bourke Paul Fox David Jones Megan Martin Prue Slatyer Christopher Vernon Australian Garden History Vol. 14 No 4 January/February 2003 3 The grounds of Government House Sydney: the arrows show the site for the new garden to commemorate the centenary of Australian Federation. Photo: Courtesy Room 4.1.3. to Commemorate the Centenary of Federation T o celebrate the Centenary of Federation the Historic Houses Trust of New South Wales initiated a competition for the design of a new garden within the grounds of Government House, Sydney. Robert Griffin discusses the project. The Background I, o - iO'.0 U The Government House Conservation and Management Plan, while recommending the development of a Garden Master Plan, also contained specific policies for the gardens and grounds.The area of the South Eastern Gardens, which included the 1980s tennis court and the Spring Walk was described as “confused and without identity or character” and the tennis court was considered an intrusive element that should be removed.The Plan recommended that this area be “redesigned and reformed”. The Conservation Philosophy contained in the Master Plan for Government House Garden in Sydney identifies change as being a constant and essential part of the character of the garden. The Master Plan also recommended that the area of the South Eastern Gardens be redesigned. The garden beds and grassed areas were assessed as having little or no significance and the area was identified as one possessing the opportunity for change and development. While change may involve conservation actions. Outstanding new design and craft skills are a further area in which change background: Ticket to a talk given by Peter Watts, Director of the Historic Houses Trust of New South Wales and Chairman of the Australian Garden History Society, on the results of the competition for the Federation Garden at Government House Sydney. could be managed. The garden at Government House represents a highly significant example of design, and regrettably, not all subsequent changes have refected this level of skill. There is a great opportunity at Government House to use the best available local landscape design and horticultural skills to redesign components of the garden when change is necessary.This would consolidate Government House in the public mind as a symbol of national excellence. This approach, the introduction of contemporary landscape design into the garden whilst respecting the integrity of historic- elements or compartments, is consistent with the ‘To Furnish the Future’ policy adopted for the conservation and ongoing presentation of the interiors of Government House. It also recognises that Government House is not an ‘historic house museum’ frozen in time, but a ‘working house’, where ongoing and future development of the garden and grounds must be of the highest standard and, ideally, showcase the best of New South Wales landscape and garden design. The Centenary of Federation in 2001 provided an ideal opportunity to commence this project as Government House has important associations to the period of Federation, early Governor-Generals of Australia and the newly federated Commonwealth. It was proposed that the South Eastern Garden site be used to create a new garden to commemorate the Centenary of Federation. 4 AusTikALiAN Garden History Vol. 14 No 4 January /February 2003 To achieve the highest standards of design and horticultural skills for this new garden, a two-stage design competition was held for New South Wales-based firms listed with the Australian Institute of Landscape Architects. The Design Competition The project outcome, as stated in the Competition Brief, was for a conceptual design for a garden in the southern portion of the Eastern Gardens of Government Hotise.The design should respond to the adjacent garden compartments of the Eastern Terrace and Forecourt Lawn and express in some manner the significance of Federation whilst demonstrating the highest level of contemporary, innovative design skills. The brief encouraged the development of project teams with an interdisciplinary approach to develop a garden design that demonstrated the best of contemporary landscape design, horticultural skill and environmental art.The brief also stated that the term ‘garden’ was used in the widest sense, that the garden may include any form of landscape or environmental art and could have the most simple of landscape treatments or more complex solutions.The budget for the project was to be between $10,000 and $200,000. The design competition consisted of two stages - Expressions of Interest and Concept Designs by short-listed applicants. A Selection Committee was formed to assess the Expressions of Interest received and select five applicants to prepare preliminary designs which would then be presented to the Selection Committee, which had the option of recommending one, or it need be, none of the designs to the Trust for implementation. The Selection Committee comprised: Peter Watts, Director, Historic Houses Trust (Chair); Dr James; Broadbent, Senior Curator, Historic Houses Trust; Ian Innes, Horticultural and Landscape Officer, Royal Botanic Gardens; Ron Powell, Public Buildings Project Manager, Dept, of Public Works and Services; Professor James Weirick, School of Landscape Architecture, University of New South Wiles; Helen Lochhead, Urban Design Advisory Service, Dept, of Urban Affairs and Planning; Bridget Smyth, former Director, Urban Design, Olympic Co¬ ordination Authority (First Stage) and Ann Toy, Government FTouse Supervising Curator (Second Stage). The Expression of Interest was circulated amongst New South Wales firms listed with the Australian Institute of Landscape Architects. Sixteen responses were received and of these, nine firms provided submissions to proceed to the second stage of the competition. While this response was disappointing in number - it appeared that many firms were busy with existing projects — a good range of firms submitted, demonstrating a variety of experience and design philosophies. From the submissions received the Selection Committee chose five applicants to proceed to the second stage.They were: Andrew Pfeiffer (Project team: Andrew Pfeiffer & Stuart Drury) Aji ton James Design (Project team: Anton James & Geoffrey Britten) Context Landscape Design (Project team: Oi Choong, Nadia Gill & Janet Lawrence) Johnson Pilton Walker - formerly DCM Sydney (Project team: Richard Johnson & Adrian Pilton) Room 4.1.3 (Project team: Vladimir Sitta, Richard Weller, Nathan Greenhill & Tom Griffiths) In July 2001 a detailed briefing session was held at Government House for these project teams. Each firm was required to prepare two B1 sheets, one with a coloured concept plan and the other with conceptual images/sketches to illustrate the intent of the design. Design intent, strategies, philosophy, plants lists or descriptions and other details were to be included on the drawings. An order of cost to deliver the proposed design, including professional fees, was also to be provided and a presentation made to the Selection Committee, explaining the principles of the scheme. The Recommendation Following presentations by each of the five finalists, the Selection Committee recomm¬ ended that the Trust commission Room 4.1.3 to undertake re-design of the south eastern garden area for a new garden to commemorate the Centenary of Federation. The design by Room 4.1.3 was considered strongly symbolic of the Centenary of Federation and its concept, encompassing the entire area identified in the Brief, possesses much strength, particularly the balance it establishes with the adjoining garden compartments. This is achieved through a strong resolution for the site - the clearing away of elements not possessing significance — and the links established to the adjoining compartments.These are the introduction of a principal water elemen t sited on the axis of the fountain of the Eastern Terrace and the contrast provided by a meandering path, with a water rill, to the formal paths of the Eastern Terrace. Further strengths are that a major new decorative element for the gardens is provided in an almost incidental manner, and the way in which the design resolves the tension between two major compartments of the gardens - the formal Eastern Terrace and the ‘pleasure garden’ to be re-instated on Western Terrace. background: Preliminary 'doodle sketch’ from which concept evolved. Courtesy Room 4.1.3. Australian Garden History Vol. 14 No 4January/February 2003 5 Below: Concept plan submitted by Room 4.1.3. Reproduced by courtesy Room 4.1.3. The Design Intent submitted by the Team from Room 4.1.3. The scheme threads a new picturesque circuit through the site. Interrupting this picturesque route is a large granite slab tilted up out of the ground. From under the slab a fine rill of water flows off into the distance and disappears behind some trees and shrubs. Upon the surface of the slab is a brass plaque explaining that visitors should follow the flow of water and that it will lead into a secret garden. The secret garden is a simple ‘green room’ made from high, thick hedges set deep in the broader landscape of the Government House grounds.The ‘green room’ is an 8m x 8m square. Parts of the room’s green walls can be adjusted and fibre optics convert it into a luminous lantern at night. At the entrance to the room are two large (Grecian) urns, one is full of black pebbles and the other full of white. The plaque invites visitors to select a black or white pebble and enter the green room. The plaque suggests they throw their chosen pebble into a large pool of water as in a wishing well.The water from the rill that leads to the gaalen spills into this pool. The plaque also briefly explains that the simple action of selecting a pebble recalls the ancient Greek method of voting on the issues of the day. One might also note that the urns containing the black and white pebbles sit in squares of terracotta fragments. These fragments (i ostroika ) are the same as those upon which the Greeks would inscribe the name of a political figure to be ostracised from the polis. For those wishing to stay after they have ‘cast their vote’ there is a 7m long solid stone seat. The seat is made by selecting the highest quality stone from each state and territory of Australia and then joining them exactly according to the shapes by which the states and territories are joined on a map of Australia .Visitors then leave the garden by a small gap in the hedges and continue on their picturesque circuit. This small intervention in Sydney’s Government House not only recalls western political traditions and reminds visitors that Australia was formed mainly by the vote, not by violence. It is also mindful of the fact that indigenous Australians were ostracised from the political processes of much of the history of our first 100 years of Federation. Moreover, the design continues a tradition of classical references in gardenesque antipodean follies. Room 4.1.3. designed the ‘Garden of Australian Dreams’ at the National Museum in Canberra and has been short¬ listed in the international competition for a memorial garden to the victims of the attach on The Pentagon on September 11, 2001. PLAN n. mlr) I. Bronze utter rill ret in stone in decomposed granite path with special night lighting, 1 Bronze urns containing black and white pebbles standing on sandstone pedestals in squares of terracotta fragments. 3. Sandstone walls form garden FFL 13.0. 4. Mature hedge* 3.0m high with special night lighting, 5. Decomposed granite surface. 6. Scat comprised of stone from each Australian state and territory. 7. Bronze and hUck granite wishing well Max 300mm deep, with special night lighting effect*. 8. Steps to broader garden circuit. Robert Griffin works with the Historic Houses Trust of New Sotith IVales as Curator, Government blouse Sydney. He was the project manager for the Eastern Garden Design Competition. 6 Australian Garden History Vol. 14 No 4 January/February 2003 Geelong's 21st Century Gardens ... The two very different sections of the Geelong Botanic Gardens now counterpoint and complement each other in a marvellous way and epitomise most eloquently what Garden History is really about... - a visitor to the Gardens G eelong’s 21st Century Garden extends an existing garden and in so doing acknowledges the many changing aspects of public and botanical gardens, but it also re-focuses attention on Daniel Bunce’s 19th century garden. Visitors from the waterfront are drawn in through the new entrance in Eastern Park to discover the historical heart of the gardens. The 1851 vision for these, the fourth oldest botanic gardens in Australia, was to develop the entire 81 h reserve as an intensively managed botanical garden. In practical terms, the site, swept by coastal winds, and the dry climatic- conditions obliged Daniel Bunce, the first curator, to modify the extent of the gardens. He established the nursery in the most sheltered section of the reserve and this area became the original Botanic Gardens characterised by a strongly linear design.The surrounding land was planted with conifers and became known as Eastern Park. Daniel Bunce’s embryonic garden was the centre for plant introduction, acclimatisation, research and trial plantings of exotic and native species.To-day many of these survive as much¬ loved features of the Geelong Botanic Gardens. The Chilean Wine Palm Jubaea chilensis ) has been adopted as the symbol of the Gardens, but the Chinese Maidenhair Tree ( Gingko biloba) and the stand of Bunya Bunya ( Araucaria bidwillii ) are equally impressive. Our colonial forebears sought relief from the antipodean heat in the shade offered by the trees and the illusion of coolness given by the water in pools and fountains, as well as the later attraction of the great Raddenbcrry fernery. 1 The contemporary visitor is more inclined to enjoy the sun, will drive as much as walk, will be aware of the need for water conservation and may be interested in native plant species and the original use of the area by the indigenous inhabitants. ‘...a celebration of contemporary design, local ecology, the seaside environment, the commitment of Friends and Staff', and the place of the Wdthurong people ... ‘ Chris Dance, designer of the new gardens The Long Range Master Plan for the Geelong Botanic Gardens, completed in 1994, highlighted HI tl vS L/jL— 1 L'K 1 1 h 1 4 J-|.. 1 " ' ■TV*. 1 L ' " m. m 1 * \ ’Jr* 1 the gardens’ important role in education, Inside the 21 st Century , , - Garden conservation, research and management of diverse plant collections. In 2000 the City of Greater Geelong committed $2.1miUion towards the construction of the 21st Century Garden. It was opened in September 2002. The new garden, designed by Chris Dance Land Design gives a ‘strong and dramatic sense of arrival’ for visitors and caters for pedestrian and vehicular traffic coming in from the re-vitalised Geelong Waterfront, now a lively tourist precinct. Modern material and landscape elements such as the ornamental fence and sculptures are in startling contrast to the layout of the original 19th century-style garden that is concealed behind this hillside contemporary development. Geelong’s heritage and geographical location as a significant port, is commemorated through the use of boat-shaped rock features, mast-like sculptures and the inspired link to Corio Bay and the Geelong Waterfront. ... in the collaboration between designer and the GBG ... this new ‘meeting of minds’ has given the new garden both ‘diversity and drama’... -John Amott, Director of the Geelong Botanic Gardens Australian Garden History Vol. 14 No 4Jaimary/Fcbmary 2003 7 fr||| ^rT- - ->- *-• t*» >r V •'4&Jpit- s '• Ur '^Sl'l ‘ i '( 1W ^01 fev - '.fM (4 The Plantings 1. The Regional Gardens Perhaps the most important aspect of the entrance garden design is to showcase the indigenous regional flora through the architectural planters that line the entrance driveway, gradually asserting more dominance as the garden entrance is approached. The 13 boat shaped beds, planted out with indigenous native grasses and lilies, sit comfortably within the Eastern Park landscape which itself has retained remnant native grasses in the understorey — Kangaroo Grass (Thancda triandra), Wallaby Grasses (Austrodanthoniassp.) and Spear Grasses (Austrostipa ssp.). Native Lilies Patersonia occidetttalis Pfragilis Wallaby Grasses Austrodanthonia racemosa A.genticulata A. set ace a A. caespitosa Spear Grasses Austrostipa mollis A. scabra ssp.falcata A.semibarbata elegantissima Tussock Grasses Poa siebierana P. poiformis Sedges Carex tasmanica lsolepis nodosa 2. Entrance Landscape The planting in this area needed to complement the strong landscape elements of the grand steps, boat bow, ornamental fence and arbor sculptures. Imposing plants with strong architectural form, setting the scene for the collections within the garden itself were selected. Mauritius Hemp Furcraea foetida Taiwanese Sago Palm Cycas taitungensis Brachychiton rupestris Xantlwrrhoca johnstonii Banksia intcgrifolia Hrysocephalum apiculatum 3. Dianella Rock Garden The area represents the important research role a botanic garden fulfils. Botanist Geoff Carr is undertaking the taxonomy of this important and diverse group of plants. There are 40 documented species of Dianella but Carr’s research indicates that this is not truly representative. He believes there are well over 100 species and this collection is intended to support his research as well as displaying the diversity of Dianella. 4. Indigenous Plant Beds To date no public garden has displayed the flora of the Geelong region. The collections will focus broadly on coastal plants, the Grassy Ecosystems and the Heathlands associated with the Brisbane Ranges and the Anglesea Heath for example the endemic and rare Anglesea Queensland Bottle Tree Grass Trees Coast Banksia Everlasting Daisy Grevillea ( Grevillea infecunda) and the Golden Grevillea (G. chryophea ) Austral Grass Tree Xanthorrhoea australis Common Everlasting Chrysocephalum apiculatum Sticky Everlasting Bracteantha viscosa Chamomile Sunray Rhodanthe anthemoides 5. Gardening in Geelong This collection will serve to educate local visitors by displaying indigenous, native and exotic plants that are considered suitable for Geelong gardens and gardeners.The plants do not require much watering, do not have environmental weed potential, may encourage local wildlife and are functional and attractive across a range of applications. 6. Dracaena draco Bed Reputed to be one of the first plants that Daniel Bunce planted in the late 1850s, this imposing specimen of Dracaena draco was moved, with Heritage approvals and assistance from Established Tree Trans¬ planters, from its original site in Eastern Park to become a focal point in the 21st Century Garden. 7. Arid Plants This bed features plants from arid zones of the world, the cacti from the Americas, the succulents of Southern Africa and the arid flora of Central Australia. The specimens, such as the Barrel Cactus (Ecltinocactttsgrunsonii) are likely to attract strong visitor empathy through their ‘wow’ appeal. Aloes, Pelargoniums, Kniphofia and various species of Bulbs also find a place in this area. Australian Garden History Vol. t4No 4January /February 2003 9 The Plantings 8. Central Australian Flora The plants here are all from Central Australia and include a number of endemics — the Central Australian Cabbage Palm ( Livistona mariae) and the MacDonnell Ranges Macrozamia (Macrozamia macdoimellii). 9 Gondwana Plants This theme was included in the design due to three imposing specimens of Bunya Pine ( Araucaria bidwitlii) which were retained front original Eastern Park planting after consultation with Heritage Victoria horticulturist, John Hawker. Visitors can see a number of classic Gondwana plant families in this area, including a significant collection of Araucariaceae, the majority of which were collected by Alistair Watt during his collecting trips to New Caledonia. The dramatic Dracaena draco is cleverly positioned between the old and the new gardens giving the visitor an overview of the 21st Century Garden, but also taking them back to the threshold of the 19th Century Garden. Just inside the gates a pair of the figurative bollards that are now a signature feature of the Geelong waterfront lure people into the historic section of Geelong’s Gardens linking the 19th and 21st centuries with wit and humour. 1 See Ken Duxbury ‘Planting anti Planning Victorian Ferneries’, Aust-ralian Carden History, Vol. 13 No. 5 March/April 2002, pp.10- 13. Thanks to John Arnott, Director of the Geelong Botanic Gardens, and to Chris Dance Design for the information in this article. Welcome to the 19th Century Geelong Botanic Garden. Decorated bollards in the Geelong Botanic Gardens represent the first curator, Daniel Bunce and a lady naturalist. 10 Australian Garden History Vol. 14 No 4 January /February 2003 a Small Landscape left: Detail of the Reflecting Pool. Photos: Nina Crone One week after the dedication of the $29m MEMORIAL to the Oklahoma bombing, the Australian Governor-General of the day, SirWilliam Deane, dedicated a modest memorial in Port Arthur, Tasmania. That memorial, opened on 28 April 1999, represents the complex issues for coming to terms with the past, the present and the future. A ustralia’s ‘European’ history, according to author Robert Hughes, starts at Port Arthur. The mellow ruins clustered around Mason Cove represent the last tangible evidence of why we are here.Tasmania’s identity has largely been formed from a time conveniently ‘post-convict’. Only recently have we started to accept our infamous past. Following the brutal assassinations of 28 April 1996, threats to erase the place were voiced, suggestions of a name change were mooted, and it looked as if the recent horrors, too horrid to imagine, would shunt the earlier history of Port Arthur back into the safety of the top cupboard. Was denial once more setting in — just when we had begun to do something about it? After all we had just begun to reach towards a mature understanding of what it means to be a Tasmanian — one that neither denies the past, nor pretties it, nor wallows in an orgy of debilitating self-guilt. 1 The Historic: Site Port Arthur is recognised as Australia’s most important historic site for reasons at odds with its 19th century picturesque landscape. The Port Arthur Historic Site Management Authority has the complex task of revealing this key part of Australian history, a part that has been no more than a curiosity for the last 130 years. The dichotomy that arises between the picturesque scene of rolling lawns and deciduous trees and the unpalatable truths of human suffering lurking beneath the turf is the clash of the physical landscape with the human landscape. Port Arthur consists of layer upon layer of human landscape from the pre-European, through the convict system, through the town of Carnarvon that occupied the site, to the contemporary managed historic site. Each layer has its own integrity. So which historic landscape should be restored? This is the ongoing challenge for the Management Authority. As Australians, it is our task to not only see through the surface of Port Arthur to our origins in this country, but to understand objectively the attitudes that prevailed over the last 130 years, from the closure of the penal settlement to today. Public memorials are a symbolic form of collective memory. But, however well designed, memorials can slip out of the public consciousness. As German writer Robert Musil explains: ‘There is nothing more invisible than a memorial’. These invisible memorials - on our intersections, adorning our town halls and in city parks - are physical reminders of how a community once felt. The landscape as a creative medium is problematic when used as a memorial. Whether it is a pastoral scene along the Somme or the rolling lawns of Port Arthur landscape fogs our power of imagination and blunts our sense of history.Yet, is it not fitting for an historic site to consist of purely landscape elements as the remnants of human occupation decay? The Memorial The Port Arthur Memorial came four years after the shooting tragedy in which a gunman killed 35 people, 22 of whom were in the Broad Arrow Cafe. Many others were wounded and many more were severely traumatised.The tragedy saw the very worst the human condition can offer, as well as the very best, in the way people selflessly reacted to what fate had given them that day. In the months and years following 28 April 1996, the local community suffered unimaginable pressure: people moved out, friendships and relationships broke down. At the same time community bonds were strengthened as people rethought their future .To those of us not there the events of 28 April 1996 seem both abstract and remote. The language of commemoration takes many forms: among them prose, poetry, music, film, art, architecture and landscape architecture. The months following the tragedy at Port Arthur saw pens put to paper, oil to canvas, words to songs, notes to music. At the commemoration services, the names of the deceased were read out, candles were lit, doves released and roses layed. Australian Garden History Vol . 14 No 4 January /February 2003 1 1 The Memorial at Port Arthur Historic Site incorporates the remains of the Broad Arrow Cafe, a Reflecting Pool and indigenous plants. Photo: Nina Crone A temporary wooden cross with a list of the deceased was raised at the edge of Mason Cove, in front of one of Australia’s most photographed landscapes. The site of the new memorial encompasses the Broad Arrow Cafe, built in the 1950s as a sporting pavilion and change room, later converted to a cafe and souvenir shop for the historic site, and on April 29,1996 becoming the most stigmatised site in Australia. Initially, there was little hesitation in starting to demolish the building. With a new visitor centre in the planning stage, it was already earmarked for removal. A group of four designers was invited to submit concept plans to the newly formed Port Arthur Memorial Committee, but the design process soon ground to a halt as the community was divided over whether to keep or demolish the surviving stone and concrete walls of the Broad Arrow Cafe. Some thought it too brutal a reminder, others felt the need to preserve the fabric of the site in order to locate the exact spot where loved ones had died. At this point Jane Lennon and Associates carried out a Social Impact Study of the site to assess its social significance to the local and national communities. The result was that the Broad Arrow Cafe was considered a socially significant site; however the community was, and remains, divided about tliis issue. As the windowless ruins of Port Arthur are the key to the origins of European Australia, so the ruin of the Broad Arrow is the key to this point in history. Less than a metre below the surface of the new memorial site he the remains of the crude huts that once sheltered leg-ironed convicts as they manually broke stone, day in, day out. Now sealed beneath hallowed ground, the story of these artefacts has yet to be interpreted. The rest of the memorial site was formerly the visitor car park, backed by a bluestone quarry and native re-growth. Management guidelines for this area encourage indigenous vegetation. Traditional memorial planting has tended towards symbolic roses and evergreen trees and hedges. The rose bush with its lifelong relationship to secateurs, may well show growth and renewal in a simplistic way, but the evolving growth pattern of a garden is never allowed in such stilted sites of commemoration. We can use the ephemeral nature of plants to acknowledge changing meanings and attitudes towards a memorial. The visual dynamic between the structural elements and plants can be allowed to change over the memorial’s lifetime. To its credit the Port Arthur Memorial Committee named the entire site ‘The 12 Australian Garden History Vol. 14 No 4January/February 2003 Memorial’, instead of the usual title of ‘Memorial Garden’, which relegates planting to an entirely decorative role. Here, plants, with their power to give atmosphere, will ultimately make The Memorial mysterious and historically ambiguous. The planting, all indigenous to South-Eastern Tasmania, will evolve, die off and regenerate, changing the memorial’s appearance over time. Meanwhile, the structural elements will cement it in one part of history. The design brief required tributes to three groups most affected by the tragedy: the deceased, the wounded, and those who gave aid on the day. The temptation to use the names of the deceased was great; however some of the families of the deceased did not want the name of their loved one used on this stigmatised site. The design therefore took a more poetic approach to commemoration. InThe Memorial, text is one of the keys to memory. Local resident and writer, Margaret Scott, wrote the lines that are carved into the basalt paving: Death has taken its toll. Some pain knows no release. But the knowledge of brave compassion shines like a pool of peace. And around the reflecting pool: May we who come to this garden cherish life for the sake of all those who died. Cherish compassion for the sake of all those who gave aid. Cherish peace for the sake if those in pain. These words acknowledge the ongoing nature of trauma and the fact that this memorial is as much for the living as it is for the dead. This sensitive part of the design was later somewhat derailed when, a day before the dedication, a bronze plaque with all 35 names and an image of the temporary cross, was tactlessly placed in The Memorial.Though well-meant, this unfortunate plaque remains (now with only 34 names),as does the temporary wooden cross with its own list, diverting attention away from Margaret Scott’s thoughtful words. There still seems to be competition to commemorate the Port Arthur tragedy. Like all cultural landscapes, The Memorial’s use and its social significance will change over time. The passing of this generation may well see The Memorial more as a historic curiosity than a sacred site. Port Arthur has one such example already, the avenue of cypress planted to commemorate First World War veterans from the Tasman Peninsula. Although the Memorial Avenue had great social significance 80 years ago, it has virtually none today. The Port Arthur Memorial’s power to transcend social change will be its ability to speak to the individual: only time will tell. The Port Arthur Memorial is about remembering and forgetting. It is a public expression of a particular community’s grief. It acknowledges a piece of history that our instincts tell us to forget.The Memorial is a small landscape with great meaning and in the future it may well continue that meaning in the context of an historic landscape. Torquil Canning is a Tasmanian landscape designer who worked with The Port Arthur Memorial Committee to develop a sensitive andfitting tribute to those caught up in the events of 28 April 1996. j Peter Hay/Port Arthur - where meanings collide’, Island, Issue 67,1996, p.70. ‘The public expression of a particular community’s grief.’ Photo: Sue Keon-Cohen Australian Garden History Vol . 14 No 4January/Febmary 2003 13 C.F. Newman and Son’s Model Nursery c. 1890s. Looking S from the District Road entrance. The main house is the building in the foreground on the left. Reproduced with kind permission ofAlwin Clements. C onvicted in 1871 of stealing plants in the Botanic Gardens, Charles Newman was to become one of South Australia’s most prominent and respected nurserymen. In later years he sold plant varieties he had cultivated to the Botanic Gardens from which he was accused of stealing. Within Adelaide gardening circles the account of C.F. Newman and Son’s Nursery at Water Gully has often been told. It is a remarkable story of development, expansion and commitment to the nursery industry within a fledgling colony. The Newman family arrived in South Australia in 1846, only ten years after the colony had been proclaimed. Charles Newman was eleven years old when he emigrated from Germany with his family. His father Carl Newman (formerly Carl Neumann 1 ) was a farmer." In the early stages of colonial expansion many German emigres to South Australia dominated the occupations of farming and market gardening.' Yet the following entry, written in 1909, shows that it took some time for these growers to become established: Horticulture as a business made extremely slow progress for the first half century of [Adelaide’s] colonial history. In the earlier period., fresh fruit was an unattainable luxury. There are still persons living who can remember when almost the only fresh fruit to be had was the water-melon while for cooking purposes pine-melons and pumpkins had to do duty. Bottled fruits were largely imported from England and were soldfreely in grocers’ shops for more than twenty years after the colony was founded. 4 The influx of many productive German immigrants to the colony provided industry and wealth. Charles Newman was to be an extremely industrious member of society. By the time he was 20 he had purchased land at Houghton, approximately 17km NE of Adelaide, and built himself a dwelling 5 . In 1857 he married Mary Anne Maria Bales, the daughter of the local hotel licensee, a union that produced 17 children (3 of whom died young). 6 To obtain money for land purchases and to finance the major project of building a nursery, Newman tendered successfully for building contracts around the district ofTeaTree Gully. It would appear from contemporary photographs of the nursery infrastructure that the experience gained in constructing public buildings greatly benefited the nursery. 7 At 32 years old Charles Newman had a property that‘covered nearly 500 acres’. S The Cyclopedia of South Australia, first published in 1909, states that the Newman nursery at Water Gully \vas founded towards the latter end of the forties’. 9 Other sources have the nursery being'established’ in 1875. 10 At this time in Adelaide’s Botanic Gardens, the Palm House structure was imported from Bremen, Germany, and it was officially opened in 1877." At this early stage of Adelaide’s development the Botanic Gardens would have been of keen interest to nurserymen and market gardeners like Newman, 14 Australian Garden History Vol. 14 No 4January /February 2003 especially as it was located so close to where the growers sold their produce at the East End Market. Charles Newman’s interest in the Botanic Gardens was perhaps keener than most for in 1871 ‘the market gardener of Water Gully, was charged with stealing plants, valued at one pound and ten shillings, from the Botanic Gardens on July l’. 12 He was convicted and sentenced to one month’s hard labour in goal by the magistrate. A previous conviction and fine, for a similar offence, had been registered. 12 In 1868, the Director of the Botanic Gardens, Dr. Schomburgk, had reported that due to: .. .great many depredations [sic] having largely been committed in the Garden, it was resolved that a reward of 25 pounds should be offered to any persons who gave such information as may lead to the conviction of any persons stealing plants or flowers. Also that advertisement to that effect should be inserted twice in the daily and weekly papers and placards should be stuck up on several places in the Gardens’ 14 According to evidence given by the son of a Garden employee, Newman was seen in the Botanic Gardens stooping over some geraniums and was later identified nearby in East Terrace. He was arrested by Detective • ? 15 Doyle ‘who found no plants on him’. Newman claimed that he was not in the Gardens and had a witness to that fact, adding that it was ‘curious how you always pitch upon tne’. 16 At court, the Newman case came before Mr. S. Beddome, PM and Dr. Schomburgk, JP 17 (the Botanic Gardens Director). In October of that year Detectives Mortimer and Doyle attempted to claim the reward of twenty-five pounds from the Governors of the Botanic Garden for arresting Newman stealing plants, but were unsuccessful. 18 This episode was just a brief interruption to Charles Newman’s work in developing one of the colony’s most significant nurseries. Operating initially under the title of the Mode! Nursery, it was later known as C. F. Newman and Son. 17 The site at Water Gully was considered to be ‘one of the finest of its kind in the State’," and it included a nursery, market gardens and an orchard. There are excellent contemporary photographs, which show the main house, and the nursery buildings, including shade, glass and hot houses. The orchard,‘covering 100 acres of ground’" 1 was on a hillside to the NE of the nursery buildings. A report from a Field --'mekemrz mm. SWJK. PALM5. MAUVE 11 aw Hornor. \%m> m. roiEr max emm vtczxta. i Of. NEWMAN ANP 50U WATER OILY N1J5EEY map cowup m vwrtv m f#* m i tut w Btffl mnc. win tvrnm. uotomcM »km n-m atwewrs tw us memories ex ne west® Ww-\ 9205 . WCh BMIPPLM5 SEPTEMBER 2 l X r> EMWNCE rz(M AN51EYSHU. mw N Naturalists’ excursion to the nursery in 1898, gives the reader just a brief glimpse into the past: In driving up the private road leading to the nursery, the native lilac, as Kennedya monophylla is popularly known, was often seen and as frequently admired. On reaching the house Newman met the party... [and] conducted than through the conservatories. Here were to be seen gay cinerarias, sweet-scented hyacinths, . . . lovely orchids from other climes surpassing in beauty even those already gathered in the field, fragrant gardenias ... and many other choice blooms. Ferns, palms and decorative plants generally lent a pleasing setting to Flora’s many gems. In a shade house some camellia bushes of unusual height, and bearing many flowers, evoked much C.F. Newman and Son Water Gully Nursery Map compiled and modified from existing map held by Beth Brittle, with additional information from Alwin Clements and his memories of the nursery in the mid-1920s, Drawn by Cas Middlemis in September 2002. Australian Garden History Vot. 14 No 4 January/February 2003 15 commendation. One of the principle [sic] objects of the visit was to see Mr. Newman’s daffodils. Out in the open air is quite a plantation of these popular flowers, with their many varieties. Although a little early there are still hundreds in bloom, and these, with an almost equal number of hyacinths adjacent, formed a pretty picture, and make the air fragrant with their pc fume. Later on these beds will be gay with tulips. C.F. Newman and Son also established a shop at 17 Rundle Street, Adelaide where from 1893 to 1902, 23 the buyer could purchase ‘fresh flowers daily, mixed bird seed, agricultural seeds, flower and vegetable seeds’. 24 All the Newman children were employed at some stage at the nursery or in the shop, but they were not paid cash for their services. - ' The benefits of such an extensive family cannot be overlooked. Mrs. Newman also assisted greatly in the success of the nursery and was by all accounts an amazing woman. ‘She taught young apprentices the art of floral arrangements, wreath and posies’ and for over 25 years she drove down to the East End Markets to take the produce to market. 26 Charles’ sixth son, Frederick Christopher Newman, remained at the nursery working with his father. Other family members were also involved within the industry either setting up on their own, or under the C. E Newman and Son name. George and John Newman are listed as gardeners working out of Chain of Ponds and Inglewood in South Australia” .The eldest son, Charles, moved to Perth to set up a branch of the company interstate. Henry (known as Harry), Alfred and Walter also moved to Western Australia, the latter two established orchards and 28 market gardens. In 1894 the nursery published an extensive sales catalogue. Along with plant descriptions and illustrations, it offered planting advice and landscaping services: Having secured the services of one of the best Landscape Gardeners of the colony, we are prepared to furnish plans and estimates for the laying-out and planting of new gardens or for re-laying old ones. We are also enabled to build ferneries, rockeries [etc], in the most handsome way.’ top: Nursery ruins looking N from inside the former hothouse. Newman designed a complex water management system with water tanks inside nursery buildings making plant watering easier. Rainwater was collected in tanks above and below ground level. Photo: Cas Middlemis, August 2002. above: Looking NE over nursery ruins. In the foreground are the foundations of the hot houses. The standing walls to the right are the dividing wall between the shade house and the stables, and beyond is the packing shed wall. Part of the main house walls (centre) is also still standing. Photo: Cas Middlemis, August 2002. Several Australian plants such as Clianthus dampieri (Sturt’s Pea) 30 are listed along with an imported German collection. Under the title ‘Last year’s novelties in vegetable seeds’ is listed Reeves’Early Adelaide Market Cabbage: This new variety has been raised by a local market gardener, and has been grown by him to supply the Adelaide market during the last two seasons. Its special features are great productiveness, hardiness and that it is very early. It may be planted close together, and will stand the dry weather well. Per packet, 6d. u At Water Gully the Newmans also propagated new plant varieties. This is highlighted on an invoice of plants sold to the Botanic Gardens. 32 Varieties of coleus included ‘Mrs A. Palm’ (who was Georgina, the Newmans 5th child) and ‘Mrs H. Bothe’ (Wilhelmine, the 4th child), as well as ‘Mrs. C.F. Newman’. 33 The nursery’s extensive involvement with exhibiting plants is illustrated in the following article from 1899: Mr. Newman’s connection with city flower shows dates back to 1871 and ever since that time he had regularly exhibited and won a large number of prizes for choice blooms and plants. 14 At the South Australian Horticultural and Floricultural Society Show held in 1907 the Nursery ‘carried off 120 prizes for fruits, vegetables, flowers and plants, 97 were firsts.’ 35 On 20 June 1899 Charles Newman died unexpectedly of head injuries when he fell from his horse on his way home from a council meeting. Among those who paid their last tributes and respects were ‘numerous Rundle street shopkeepers, several gardeners, [with] the director and employees of the Botanic Gardens represented by Mr. Gilpin.’ 36 With the death of Charles Newman the family began to understand the financial situation of the nursery. Poor business deals in setting up in Western Australia gravely affected the Adelaide side of the business 37 . Then in 1913 several extensive hailstorms destroyed all the glass houses with large quantities of valuable plant stock lost through flooding, 3S all of which seriously impacted on the viability of the nursery. When Harry Newman returned to Adelaide from Perth, he assumed control ofWater Gully. On Harry’s return, Frederick, who had been running the nursery since the death of their father, left in 1925 to set up his own nursery business in Tea Tree Gully. It would appear that during Harry’s charge the nursery’s fortunes further declined, reflecting economic trends both locally and nationally. The rich ‘harvest’ of the nursery industry in the later part of the 19th century was not reflected in the early 20th century. When Mrs. C.F. Newman died in 1932 J . 'IQ aged 94 years, the children sold the nursery. 16 Australian Garden History Vol. 14 No 4 January/February 2003 w*V> Moughfon, e/W . ffl 7 / S\ ir. to 0. F 1 Descendants of Charles Newman, Miss Beth Brittle and Mr. Alwin Clements, have done extensive research into the family history but there are many gaps in the knowledge of how the nursery operated. It would appear that there are no existing order books, nursery employee lists and other‘paperwork’ necessary to run such an extensive concern. However, one interesting document found in the Botanic Garden Archives is an invoice to Dr. Schomburgk dated May 1887, which hsts plants sold to the Gardens by C. F. Newman. Today the extensive foundation ruins of the Newman nursery he nestled within the Anstey Hill Recreation Park, Tea Tree Gully. Their tangible presence is a stimulating reminder to the garden historian of the fragile nature of our built environment and the forces of nature. Further photographs Those interested in seeing other early photographs of the nursery held by the State Library of South Australia should log on to www.slsa.sa.gov.au then, via ‘catalogues’ go to the ‘Mortlock Library South Australiana Database’. Highlight ‘keywords’, type in ‘Newman’s Nursery’ and follow the directions. Acknowledgments Sincere thanks to Mrs Suzanne Hall, the daughter of Frederick Christopher Newman, Miss Beth Brittle, the grand-daughter of John William Newman, and Mr. Alwin Clements, the grand¬ son of Charlotte Newman for so generously sharing their knowledge and stories of the Newman family. 11 12 H 15 I.Auhl, (1979). I win settlement to ritv:d.D_ district qfTcdfrcc‘ } Gnlly 18)6-1976. Blackwood: Lynton Publications Pty. Ltd. p.296. WwWehvirOrmient.ki.gov.au/bbtanicgardens / 1 1 adelaide.html South Australian Advertiser, Saturday, 15 July 1871. [p.53 on microfilm copy). * 3 Tlw South Australian Register, July 15,1871 p.3 Botanic Gardens ofAdelaide, Board Mmutes, August 18 1865 - April 1875 (October 2,1868 p.235). The South Australian Register, Saturday 15 July 1871, P-3. 1 s Spilth Australian Advertiser^ .Saturday, 15 July 1871. [p. 53 on microfilm copy], * 7 The South Australian Registeyfszturdsy, 15 July 1871, p.3. * ° Botanic Cardens of Adelaide,-Board Minutes, August 18 1865 - April 1875 (October 6,1871 p.300). C.F. Newman and Son’s General Descriptive Catalogue (1894-5).Adelaide:Vardon and Pritchard. Cyclopedia of South Australia vol. 2 (1978). Hamstead Gardens; Adelaide p.762. Advertiser,22 June 1899, p.6,column 9. Register, 16 August 1898 p.7. Sands and McDougall’s South Australian Directory 1899. Adelaide: Sands and McDougall. Sands and McDougall’s South Australian Directory 1899. Adelaide: Sands and McDougall p.669. Personal communication - Beth Brittle, 28 June , 2002 . ; Personal communication - Alwin Clements, 29 August 2002. Sands and McDougall’s South Australian Directory 1898. Adelaide: Sands and McDougall. p.483. Personal communication - Alwin Clements 9 August 2002. G.F. Neipmah and'Soil’s General Descriptive Catalogue (1894-5).Adelaide:V»rdon and Pritchard, p.l. C.F. Newmati and'Son's General Descriptive Catalogue (1894-5). Adelaide:Vardon and Pritchard. C.F Neuman and Son's General Descriptive Catalogue (1894*5). Adclaide:Vardon and Pritchard p. n.a. Botanic. Gardens of Adelaide- archival accounts. 33 19 r 20 21 22 23 ex-gS 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Beth Brittle,'28'june Neumann anglicised his name in the 1850's. See Auhl, I From settlement to.city: a history of the district of Tea Tree Gully 1836-1976. Blackwood: Lynton Publications Pty Ltd. p.295. ' W Personal communication Sands and McDougall’s South Australian Directory 2002. 1878. p.226. - Advertiser, 22 June 1899, p.6, column 9. D. Whitelock, Adelaide: Sense/of difference, 23 Cyclopedia of South Australia, vol.2 (1978). Hamstead Australian Scholarly Publishing Pty Ltd, Kcw Gardens:Adelaide p.763. (2000), p. 71. f^frflS ^hrt8g9 £r5.-^ Cyclopedia of South Australia. Vol. 2. (1978). Hampstead Gardens: Austaprint. Originally published 1909. Adelaide: Cyclopedia Co. p.95- 96 I.Auhl, (1978). From settlement to city: a history of the district ofTcaTree Gully 1836-1976. Blackwood: Lynton Publications Pty. Ltd. p.295. History ofWater Gully Appendix.Vertical file on Newman’s Nursery.Tea Tree Gully Library. Andrew Newman Hall, 23 August 1998 Mortlock Library PRG 1179/5 I.Auhl, (1978). From settlement to city: a history of the district of Tea Tree Gully 1836-1976. Blackwood: Lynton Publications Pty. Ltd, p.296. Cyclopedia of South Australia Vol. 2 (1978). Hampstead Gardens: Adelaide p.762 38 39 • Register,23 June 1889 p.5. ■ ' Personal communication - Beth Brittle, 28 June , 21 ) 02 . Advertiser. 31 October 1913, p.l 7. ' Personal communication - Alwin Clements, 9 August 2002. ❖ Cas Middlemis developed an interest in garden history while living in England. On returning home she undertook academic studies in history and geography to further this interest. While living in Perth she contributed a number of West Australian entries to The Oxford Companion to Australian Gardens. Her move to Adelaide is bringing new subjects for her enthusiasm. 3 S' 3 5" 3" 4 Z // // / 3 Z £ z_ c 3