system was contemplated
by the Victorian Government. A select committee of the Legislative
Council reported unfavorably upon the system. The Government made the
best of a bad bargain, and accepted a fee of forty shillings for the
three months ending November 30, 1853; and, on the following day, the
Legislative Council passed a new Gold-fields Act, which greatly reduced
the fees for diggers' licenses, while it substantially increased those
demanded for permission to open stores at the gold-fields. It also
provided for the grant of leases of auriferous lands, at a royalty of
not less than 5 per cent., and gave legal sanction to the customs
regarding the "claims" of diggers, which had gradually grown up to
regulate the rival interests of neighboring miners. Offences against the
act were to be decided upon by the magistrates; but the accused might
demand a court of at least two members, and there was to be an appeal to
General Sessions.

These measures were partly successful in restoring order, but it was
obvious that the gold-fields contained men who were averse to a
peaceable settlement. Notwithstanding that the number of the elective
members of the Legislative Council was more than once increased; that,
with the full consent of the Home Government, a bill was being prepared
for the introduction of responsible government; and that the material
condition of the diggers was being rapidly improved, the
Lieutenant-Governor had, in January, 1854, to report the formation of a
"diggers' congress," which obviously had for its object the supersession
of the ordinary government.

Latrobe retired from office in May of the same year, and one of the
first points noticed by his successor, Sir Charles Hotham, was the
existence of an agitation against the Chinese at the Bendigo diggings.
Notwithstanding the enthusiastic character of his reception in his
progress through the gold-fields in September, the new Governor soon had
to face serious disturbances.

The events of the next few months formed a crisis in the history, not
only of Victoria, but of Australia. Naturally there is much dispute
concerning them, and, as the following account is taken chiefly from Sir
Charles Hotham's reports, it is possible that the acts of his opponents
may not obtain strict justice. But it is admitted on all sides that Sir
Charles acted with the most perfect good faith; and the accounts given
by the insurgents are far too contradictory and prejudiced to