The General Langfitt Story
Chapter 6 - Resettlement in Australia (continued)
After almost three weeks in Cairo and Beirut, the Australian Selection Commission finally arrived in Nairobi where they started interviews with five people in Nairobi, all of whom were accepted, before proceeding to Tengeru and Koja. On 9 November, Joynes reported that 'the Displaced Persons in this area are of a particularly good robust type, a fair proportion of them being very healthy children and young people under 18 years of age who are accompanying parents under 50 years of age'.
The Medical Officer's Report on Tengeru (dated 1 December 1949) noted that 1414 people were examined, of whom 893 were accepted and 474 rejected, with 47 pending further investigation of various medical matters. Fifty were rejected for 'obvious medical deformities, such as loss of limbs etc', so that 1364 people were medically examined in eighteen working days at an average of seventy-six people a day. It was found necessary to ignore previous medical examinations conducted by medical personnel at Tengeru because they did not understand the requirements of the Australian immigration authorities, although the Medical Officer Dr J. B. Mathieson was at pains to note that the hospital at Tengeru appeared to be run very efficiently. Details of the medical examinations procedure were included in the report and particular attention was paid to the problem of malaria, which Mathieson considered had become something of 'an obsession' with residents in the settlement. 'Any headache, fever or gastrointestinal upset is diagnosed as malaria'. From 1 December 1949 all accepted migrants were placed on Paludrine, the anti-malarial drug recommended to Mathieson by the British army. They were also given inoculations against smallpox and yellow fever, TB and, for the children, a diphtheria prophylactic. Mathieson was:
most impressed with the Polish people of this camp. They are a very fine type and, I am sure, will make good New Australians. The children are remarkably healthy and fine, intelligent, physical types. The children and adolescents would compare more than favourably with any cross-section of Australians of similar age groups. The accepted migrants consist principally of women, children and adolescents. The low numbers of single males are accounted for by the fact that the Canadian Mission had confined its selection practically to this group.11
Dr Mathieson also praised the organisation of the IRO staff, Mr Arnold Curtis and Mrs Mollie Rule in particular, and the facilities placed at his disposal, including his staff of one Czech doctor and his wife, an ex-medical student, who assisted with X-rays, blood pressure readings, urine and vision testing. Two nursing sisters, one male and one female interpreter also assisted. IRO staff and the Camp Commandant and his staff 'showered hospitality' upon the Australians and made sure they were suitably accommodated and entertained. They were even treated to 'trips of great interest'. After selection procedures were completed, Mathieson addressed all the accepted migrants, issuing them 'a most sincere welcome to our wonderful country'. He continued:
You will find the Australian people one of the most democratic in the world. You will find you are in a land where class distinction has little or no significance. Although you will always have memories of pleasant associations with the land of your birth, we expect that you will never forget that you are now, first and foremost Australians. You will be placed in remunerative employment as soon as possible under the same conditions of employment and payment as the Australian workers. We wish you every happiness, success and prosperity, and on behalf of the Commonwealth of Australia we extend to you a most cordial welcome.
Although the term 'New Australian' was not used in the official version of this welcoming speech, many people recalled the use of the term. Some welcomed it as a sign of acceptance. Others felt uneasy because, as Zbigniew Patro explained:
We had decided to come to Australia but one thing struck me: one of the people from the Commission said that from now on we would be called 'New Australians'. Ever since we left Poland we had been different from others. Now I wanted to settle in this country, why should we be called something different? Why 'New Australian'? Why not just 'Australian'?
There were no detailed medical reports made for the Koja settlement, but the Australian Commission spent just over two weeks there in December processing 727 people, of whom 308 were accepted and 419 rejected.12 The Australian Selection team then returned to Nairobi to finalise the 'pending cases' from Tengeru. They left East Africa for Cairo, Beirut and Greece on 21 December 1949 and returned to Australia on 25 January 1950, after having accepted a total of 2344 people over the course of their whole mission. A final total of 1221 people had been accepted from the Tengeru and Koja settlements (report by Mathieson dated 15 February 1950).13 The Selection Commission had been strongly commended by the Head of the IRO Mission in East Africa, who deeply appreciated their 'excellent job of selection' and 'genuine human interest in our refugees ... while loyally serving Australia's interests' (letter from H. A. Curtis to Joynes, dated 20 December 1949). Mr James Kemp, the Information and Welfare Officer, left the Australian Mission in Athens, returning to East Africa to join the selected migrants on their journey to Western Australia aboard the USAT General W. C. Langfitt, which departed from Mombasa on 2 February 1950 (report to Heyes from Joynes dated 27 January 1950). According to the passenger list of the General Langfitt, there were 297 people from the Koja Camp and 832 from the Tengeru Camp, making a total of 1129 people. The discrepancy in the figures cannot be accounted for.
One final proviso is worth noting: the Australian Department of Immigration had made sure that it secured an agreement with the British authorities in Tanganyika and Uganda stating that both territories would accept the re-entry of any 'undesirables' who had crept through the selection process up to a period of twelve months after arrival in Australia, assuming that the IRO camps there were still in operation (letter from Lloyd to Heyes, dated 9 January 1950). These Polish displaced people, although accepted as New Australians, were thus placed on probation for the first year of their residence in Australia.
People who were living at the Koja and Tengeru settlements have clear memories of the visit of the Australian Selection Commission, for this provided them with their only knowledge of Australia prior to arrival. Many people commented upon the friendliness of the Selection Commission and the humane, considerate way in which the officers handled each application, especially in comparison with the rigid adherence to selection criteria shown by the Canadian mission, which had taken only single men and women and childless couples under 40 years of age.
Nevertheless, as Zofia Skarbek noted, 'we still had to go through a health check. We had to have X-rays, blood tests and urine tests. I think people with TB were excluded. There were some illnesses which were excluded no matter how humanitarian they were'. Many people found this a demeaning experience. It was clear that 'labour-value' was the primary consideration, but as more than one person observed ' 'We knew that beggars are not choosers. That is how it was'. Regina Tabaczynski likened the selection process to 'selecting horses in the market place. Health was the major criterion, not education, because they were taking us for labourers and housemaids and workers'. Aleksandra Wisniewska recalled that:
You had to strip to your underpants and they looked you up and down and poked you here, there and everywhere to ensure that you were healthy. They were not exactly delicate. A bit rough and abrupt: 'Turn. Bend.' It was humiliating in a way, but you had to be fit to work. That was the whole purpose. I was pumped up with vitamins so I would be healthy for physical work and some people went to extremes to get fit. But there were some families who were separated because one member wasn't fit enough.
The age limits created problems for many families. As Zofia Skarbek explained:
My mother was forty-three, I was school age and my brother came here on contract, but we had an aunt who survived Russia with us. We had never been parted but she was not eligible for entry to Australia because she was over fifty. This was so heartbreaking. The age was forty for women (the age limit was later increased) and forty-five for men. It was a very difficult time for us because we thought after ten or twelve years we would have to be parted and we didn't know where my aunt would go. Then some friends who had two boys who were of an age to work declared that my aunt was a relation so she was allowed to come as a refugee-migrant. It is debatable at what level they brought us here because in a way we came as refugees, in a way we came as migrants on contract. It was not really clear.
Although the age limit had been reviewed to include women up to the age of 45 as eligible for work contracts, those who were physically fit had to sign two-year contracts along with their children. Krystyna Jarzebowska's mother was 'two years too old. She was 47 and healthy for her age, but they took us because my sister and I were young and healthy. We had to sign a document to say that we would look after her, even though she had to sign a two-year contract as well. Still, I was happy that they took us.'
Single young women with two over-age parents were considered particularly 'hard core' cases and most remained ineligible for migration unless they could find a friend to conjointly sign a guarantee of upkeep. Several young people, like Bogdan Harbuz, ended up coming to Australia on their own. Other members of his family had been rejected on age and health grounds.
I was accepted because I was sixteen and I was healthy. Tropical diseases such as bilharzia, amoebic dysentery and malaria actually didn't mean very much to the Australian Commissioners. They were not familiar with those diseases, so I passed all the tests and the medical examinations. I was promised by one of the Commissioners that on arrival in Australia young boys like me would be put into school, that I would be trained and I would be an asset to Australia. Unfortunately on my arrival I found out that I was under a two-year government contract the same as everybody else and that I had to work wherever I was sent. I was promised that within a year or so my mother would join me, and then I could bring my brother-in-law and sister to Australia, that there would be no objection once I established myself in Australia. It didn't eventuate that way. But to me Australia was a place to go. It was very exotic, very far away and a place to see.