Did Dan Kelly die at Glenrowan?

When the guy that I met in Glenrowan told me about his belief that Dan and Steve hadn’t died in the inferno that destroyed Ann Jones Inn, it wasn’t the first time I had heard this story, but I had never given it more than a seconds thought before. I didn’t think any knowledgeable Kelly buff of any persuasion would take those rumours seriously, and when I mentioned them in a Blog Post last year likened them to  ‘claims of the caliber of  UFO abductees  and 911 conspiracy’ 

But then I went to Glenrowan and met that guy, who I now have learned is  Mr Gary Dean, a serious and knowledgeable Kelly buff and the author of several books about the Kelly Outbreak who clearly is convinced Steve and Dan survived. Maybe I shouldn’t have dismissed Dans survival so readily – but then, on the other hand Mr Dean did seriously entertain other ideas that were not too far from  ‘UFO abductees  and 911 conspiracy’.

There are several obvious major problems to be explained by people like Gary Dean if they expect anyone to take them seriously. Firstly, how would anyone in a cellar get out and get away unseen from the middle of the wreckage of the Inn, in broad daylight when it was surrounded by police, the press, photographers and the general public who flocked to Glenrowan to observe the goings on before during and after the siege? The Police raked two bodies out of the wreckage but didnt see two men climb up out of a cellar and slip away into the crowd? They didnt even report a cellar. Please explain why nobody ever reported seeing or meeting the two drunks whose incinerated  unidentifiable bodies were said to be Dan and Steves? And the Policeman who entered the burning Inn who positively identified Dan? 

I remembered later that in ‘The True Story of Ned Kellys Last Stand’ Paul Terry had an entire chapter devoted to the subject – Chapter 11 : Cellar Mystery. In my  review of that book last year I dismissed it as a pointless exercise whose only purpose was to bulk the book up a bit. But Ive been back to read it again, now that my curiosity about  Dan and Steves survival has been aroused, and Ive done some reading around the subject to see if I was wrong to have dismissed these stories so readily.

Actually I dismissed the entire Dig at Glenrowan, the subject matter of Paul Terrys book as a pointless exercise that began without defining what it really wanted to discover, continued as a sort of hopeful treasure hunt and concluded without adding anything of importance to what was already known.  But now I realize there was in fact one really important answer they could have obtained at that dig, something many Kelly buffs would have been desperate to know, and could have been a worthwhile focus of the whole enterprise, and that was to prove once and for all that the Ann Jones Inn actually had, or did NOT have, a Cellar.  The reason that would have been such a useful finding, is because it would establish once and for all if there was indeed a place where Dan and Steve could have sheltered and possibly survived the inferno.  Without a cellar, the survival stories don’t have a leg left to stand on but finding a cellar would at least have meant it might have been possible. Reflecting on the ghastly deaths in recent Australian bush fires, Paul Terry doubts even a cellar would have saved them – but at least finding one would have kept the possibility open. On the other hand, if no cellar was found all the survival stories can be dismissed, because they all begin with survival in a Cellar, and in one fell swoop all the claimants to be Dan or Steve exposed as crooks, or at least as delusional cranks.

But that didn’t happen. The Dig proved there wasn’t a Cellar under the Inn but they didn't dig at the place where the kitchen was, so the possibility remains. A golden opportunity to lay a Kelly Myth to rest went begging, and I am left wondering about other ways that these claims could be investigated.

One obvious place to test the idea is in the words of those men claiming to be Dan or Steve. Searching for them, one immediately encounters Councillor Paul Tully of the Ipswich City Council in Queensland.  According to the Queensland Times of 2^nd September 2011 hes been ‘hot on the trail of Queenslands connection to the Kelly Gang for 20 years’ and is shown in the Ipswich Cemetery where there is a memorial to James Ryan, a man who claimed until his death in 1948 that he was Dan Kelly. The Memorial includes a replica Kelly helmet, and an inscription that includes this statement  “Hundreds of historians from all over the country and even those who had associations with the Kellys could not disprove that James Ryan was not Dan Kelly” Tully has been trying to get this mans remains exhumed and subjected to forensic analysis to see if he was.

James Ryan is also the subject of a 2002 publication called ‘Burnt to a cinder was I?” , written by  Vince and Carolyn Allen. Vince’s grandfather Jack claimed to have known James Ryan rather well and was convinced he was Dan Kelly. 

If you search Trove for James Ryan you will find articles about him and Jack Allen in Queensland’s ‘Truth’ newspaper dated Sunday August 13^th 1933.(HERE)  and also Sunday 22nd and 29th December 1935. Here is a quote from the first paragraph of the 1935 article – read it and spot the obvious mistake:

“But this old man says he escaped from that fire. Racked by agonising burns, he crawled to the nearby scrub, and from there watched the armored Ned Kelly's last savage stand against a mob of police and civilians.”

There are many other mistakes in the claims of James Ryan that might only be obvious to someone who is familiar with the story of the Outbreak. People up in Queensland  back then, and it would seem even modern City Councillors might not have been all that familiar with the detail of the Outbreak and may not have spotted  much of the nonsense in Ryans claims, such as a claim that Neds father  was still alive when Ned went to Gaol, such as his claim that the Gaol Ned was sent to was the Berrima Gaol, that Red called Ellen ‘Kate’, that he never knew who her father was, that he and Ned never went to school, that he had a sister called Nora, that Ned wore his armour out on the highway and robbed the Ballarat Gold escort, and even that he shot and killed Fitzpatrick!  He elaborates many colourful stories that are vaguely credible but completely beyond verification, but if a person cant remember important verifiable facts like when his own father died, who his siblings were, and  when he gets the sequence of events at Glenrowan so mixed up, what credibility does he have? I wonder if Councillor Paul Tully knows that Ned was captured early in the morning and the Inn set alight at 3pm? If Ryan really had crawled out of the ruins of the Inn, Ned by that time would have been in bed at the Station under guard and being attended by the doctor. Ryans claim to have witnessed Neds last stand, the dramatic climax to the entire Outbreak, was a lie. This basic fact alone completely ruins Ryans credibility.

I’m not sure but I suspect that back in the 1930’s it wasn’t common knowledge that there are people with weird personality disorders who like to claim they were part of something big in world affairs, and become the centre of attention, gaining status and even wealth they would otherwise never get. There have been fake Holocaust survivors, fake 9/11 survivors, fake war heroes, fake Celebrities, fake cancer survivors, fake orphans - all sorts - and most of them get a huge leg-up from gullible and lazy journalists and other publicity seekers who just never bother to do basic fact checking. Do a search for “The woman who wasn’t there” for an interesting read about a woman who claimed to have survived the Twin Towers Collapse.  Also imagine how much harder it would be to disprove her story if she came forward 50 years after the event, like James Ryan did.

Clearly James Ryan was one of those attention seekers. Maybe he was genuinely delusional, and Jack Allen was taken in by him. However in the modern age of Internet and Google, Vince and Carolyn Allen, and Paul Tully have no excuse to be so ignorant of the facts of the Kelly story that they have failed to spot the litany of nonsense, the tall stories  and lies spun by James Ryan. 

So thats one of the pretenders dealt with! What about all the others? I will deal with them in Part Two. Meanwhile, your thoughts please.

The Vault Fires Back

The Top Gun is the one I saw at the Vault

A few days ago I was pleased to receive feedback from the Kelly Vault, and answers to my questions. That gun without labels that the Custodian couldn’t identify the day I was there was mistakenly displayed before the Labelling had been completed. It turns out to be a prop that was made for the Last Outlaw TV Miniseries that we reviewed here a few weeks ago, a replica of the sawn off carbine that Ned Kelly killed Lonigan with. I wish I had known at the time because that gun’s a vital element in the SBC saga that we’ve discussed at length. Ned claimed to have fired it at Lonigan and killed him stone dead with a single shot to the head  - the problem as we discussed is that Lonigan had wounds in  his left arm and left thigh as well. This is the problem a Ned Kelly Forum spokesman boasted that he had solved, but if you look top right of this Page you’ll see how many days we’ve been waiting for him to front up with the promised solution. The only way this problem can be solved is by accepting Ned Kelly didn't tell the truth about Lonigans death, but that doesn’t fit with the NKF’s view that Ned wasn’t a liar, so he’s gone silent! But wouldn’t it be more interesting if the ticket the Vault eventually attaches to this gun mentioned this conundrum?

As I suspected not all of the documents on display at the Vault are genuine - many are facsimiles because the originals have to be stored in strictly controlled environments to preserve them properly, facilities which are only  available in large Institutions. Actually, they mention that their biggest problem at the Vault, something I also noticed at the time, is the lack of space. They’ve almost outgrown the Sub Treasury building already. Never-the-less  I would like to know which is a facsimile and which is the real thing when I am looking it. 

In regard to my criticisms of the Vaults deviations from its policy of being historically accurate and balanced, and in particular in its promotion of the ‘Republic', the Vault acknowledges it as being a ‘controversial’ subject . They say they are willing to look at a rewording of those places where its mentioned and perhaps instead make the Republic the subject of a separate display in which the controversy is exposed from all sides. In fact there are lots of controversies in the Kelly story – many of them discussed here – so maybe they could refer to the others as well, while they’re about it?

They also believe that over time the Vault, and its ‘narrative’  will grow and change, an attitude which is commendable and reflective of modern views of history telling, that History  isn’t necessarily a static interpretation but one that needs to be prepared to change along with knowledge, understanding and insight of the subject under discussion. Since Ian MacFarlanes incredible work was published in 2012, challenging the status quo, new views of Kelly history are now emerging and the old Ned Kelly Villain-or-Hero dichotomy is being replaced with a demythologized but complex view of the man, and of the Outbreak.

After hearing from the Vault and reading their responses to my criticisms, and of their willingness to at least think about them and perhaps even change things a little, my initial disappointment has turned to hope. As I have said elsewhere, it wouldn’t be possible or even desirable to wipe Ned Kelly off the history pages, and its never been my desire for that to happen. What I am interested in encouraging is accuracy and honesty on those History pages, and I am now a little optimistic that the Vault may be on that same path.

It will be interesting to see how they respond over the next few months, and in August, when Darren Suttons findings are fully revealed as he has promised, I will revisit the topic and report on progress. In the meantime because they’ve responded positively  to my challenges, Ive decided to respond to their request to change the title of the post about Darren Suttons findings, though I was quite fond of the Pun in it, changing  “Forgery” to  “Controversy”.  I hope this will help to maintain friendly communications between us all, as well as demonstrate that even Dee can respond to fair criticism and move with the times!

The Rest of my Kelly Country Tour

For my money the Best experience in Beechworth is at the Courthouse. There, instead of just looking at things behind glass that relate to the Kelly story, in the Courthouse you can TOUCH the very timber that Neds hands would have touched, stand EXACTLY where he stood and see EXACTLY what he would have seen;you can sit on the very seat where Redmond Barry sat, not just look at it or read about it but sit on it and lift up the lid of the desk in front of you. Whats more, Kelly myths are not presented there as facts, and you know for sure that this place is the real thing.

The Gaol is just up the road and the outside is very impressive. The Tour is ‘self- guided’ meaning they give you an info sheet and you explore it at your leisure, following a line painted on the floor. Inside the lack of maintenance is obvious, you find empty coffee cups and odd bits of rubbish hidden away in corners and the atmosphere is one of neglect and abandonment. The Cells, including the one said to have held Ned had alterations such as modern looking toilets  and lighting which wouldn’t have been there in 1880 and so I didnt feel a sense of “Ned” in there at all. (But you DO get that sense at the Old Melbourne gaol where Ned was hanged and where things seem much closer to their original configuration.) 

I drove from there along narrow country roads and quite wonderful rural scenery to the Cemetry at Greta. I was completely on my own there, and it was a strange feeling to look among the gravestones of unremarkable people, and wonder which of the bare  patches in one corner, was the ‘unmarked’ grave of the remarkable Ned Kelly....Why I wondered, even in his home town is there nobody willing to mark his burial site and protect it? Instead they have this:

Glenrowan was the other place that I spent some time exploring. I was disappointed to get there too late to see the animated Theme Park Kelly story which I read lasts 40 minutes and ends with Neds resurrection! Maybe someone who has seen it could write a review for us! However , two other Kelly museums were open, and looked as if they were struggling to make ends meet by selling Ned souvenirs and modest entry fees to their collections of Kelly-era memorabilia. The displays are all dated and dusty, but still interesting, as was the bearded and garrulous host at one of them, a fellow who told me Dan and Steve survived the fire at the Inn by retreating to a Cellar, and one of them is buried in Queensland somewhere. He said the two unrecognisable bodies raked out of the burned ruins of the Glenrowan Inn were two innocent passersby who had passed out drunk in the Inn before the Gang took it over. He also said theres a couple of dozen other suits of armour hidden somewhere nearby, and the  Americans have a secret six story underground research Center next to a Nuclear Missile Silo in the Tanami Desert ....I bought a little tin of Outlaw Mints off him and headed for the Siege site over the railway bridge. 

Peering through the windows of the replica Station, you see a dusty uncared for room with junk lying around, and the life size wooden figures outside, representing some of the people there at the time of the siege are rotten, their paint is faded and they are falling apart. The priests head has disintegrated. The site of Ann Jones Inn is marked by that familiar Billboard, but the land itself is a horse paddock, fenced off.  Nearby, the site of Neds capture is marked by a jumble of tree trunks with a curious rusty helmeted Ned figure looking like an amputee 
collapsed between them. Theres a sense of  defeat and sadness about it.

Walking back across the bridge I realised that interest in Ned Kelly, so obvious in Beechworth is actually shrinking elsewhere in Kelly Country. At Glenrowan theres a huge statue of a gun-toting Ned outside the Post Office but all the other sites and tributes seem to be decaying, struggling to survive. Thinking about the difference between Beechworth and everywhere else I wondered if Neds apparent  popularity in Beechworth is  more to do with the popularity and beauty of Beechworth as an historic site in its own right, rather than Kelly himself. The Vault claims big numbers of visitors, but Glenrowan seemed deserted, disengaged and a  bit weird - Ned Kelly resurrection, Nuclear Silos, headless priest... Greta was also deserted and theres nothing much in Euroa.

Notwithstanding the success of the Vault - which strategically but in my view inaccurately - proclaims its neutrality about Ned, the reality on the  ground in Kelly Country seems to be that Ned Kelly mythology is in retreat. Its certainly true that Kelly Mythology is on the retreat in Cyberspace, with this blog about Ned but not about Mythology being THE most active Kelly Place on the internet by a country mile. Iron Outlaw and Kelly Forum web pages are dead with the record Lowest number of letters posted to IO (15) and on the NKF, five of its eight Forum places have had no activity at all for at least six months, and nobody has ventured into their two secret Members Only forums for over a year. Their respective Facebook pages are visited by lightweights interested in trivia. Theyre trying to stop their members interacting with this Blog, whilst visiting here secretly themselves, but as is apparent by Brian McDonlads behaviour, and the plunging participation rates all they're achieving is to drive people away. 

In the real world, even the  Ned Kelly Weekend in Beechworth  is under threat, with the group that organises it declaring on its Facebook Page that this year, if it happens at all, there will be less emphasis on Ned Kelly and more on the many other diverse facets of Beechworths colonial history. This will be a victory for the majority of us, who are sick and tired of Kelly Mythology and the ignorant people who promote it, and are excited by History,  the colourful Colonial past of Australia and the way Science and passion can continue to enlighten us. Ned Kelly and the outbreak will always be an extraordinary and tragic part of the history of that area, and nobody would want to try to expunge it from the collective memory or the history books, but I think I can see the day coming when Kelly will be remembered as a flawed, fascinating flamboyant but violent criminal and not an Icon to be set on a pedestal. He was not a hero - he was a villain who left behind a trail of many dead innocent victims  who must never be forgotten.

Kelly Country is a remarkable and throughly worthwhile place to Visit, and for Kelly buffs theres an even greater interest and fascination.Highly Recommended.

Kelly Vault Controversy

Ive been accused of jeopardising Beechworths Ned Kelly Vault by publicly pointing out some of the places where I believe the Vault doesn’t live up to its own claims to be historically accurate, balanced and impartial. In particular the Vault promotes uncritically the central element of Jones-Kelly mythology, the baseless contention that the Kelly Outbreak was all about setting up a Republic of North east Victoria. 

So far, the response from the Vault has been disappointing. Nobody from the Vault was prepared to defend the Vault except in Private. No one has answered specific questions I asked about an unlabelled gun on display in the vault, or confirmed that all the documents on display are real and not facsimiles. I asked those same questions of the Custodian at the Vault when I was there, but didnt get satisfactory answers. I am still waiting for them, and would point out that if harm is being done to the Vault, its not because questions have been asked but because they haven’t bothered to answer them, or even respond. Open-ness and honesty earns respect, but denial, shutting up Shop, censoring Face-Book discussions, and keeping silent loses it.

In this post I will provide another example of the Vaults failure to live up to its claim to be ‘ historically accurate', with reference to an object on display there which is said to be “the most significant Kelly discovery in 50 years”. 

This discovery was a piece of metal, and the inscription  reads “...beyond doubt this piece of unremarkable metal is in fact an offcut from Joe Byrnes breastplate” 

It was found by amateur Kelly historian Darren Sutton in the bush at a site thought to be the ruins of an old Bush Forge.  Its claimed that the shape of this piece matched a cut-away part of the Breastplate of Joe Byrnes armor, and thus not only was the find an original piece of the metal used to make Joes suit, but it also identified for the first time one of the places where the armour was actually made in the Woolshed Valley

This would indeed be “the most significant Kelly discovery in 50 years” …except for one thing : I remembered reading about it last year in ‘Ned Kelly Under the Microscope’ – the metal had been analysed by the Australian  Nuclear Science and Technology Organization (ANSTO) and shown NOT to be the same as the Byrne breast plate. When I got home, I looked it up to be certain and this is what it says on Page 143: 

‘It should be noted that after this body of work was concluded the author was contacted by a person claiming to have some of the parent material used in the manufacture of the armour. Subsequent examination of this material via the same techniques led to the conclusion that it was NOT of the same material as that used to construct the armour of Joe Byrne’ 

Exactly when these tests were done is not given, but certainly the book was published before the Vault was opened so there can be no doubt that the Vault and Darren Sutton knew when they made this display that it was a fraud.  

ANSTO Scientist testing Joes Armour

Out of curiosity I looked up Joe Byrne on Wikipedia, and found mention of the claim that a piece of his armour had been found, but, in commentary that had been there for several years it correctly said “According to Heritage Victoria this is not considered to be from the same metal as the suit of armor made for Joe Byrne.” 

Interestingly it then went on to say this:

‘However, the information used to make the decision on whether the offcut matched or not has been found to be inaccurate. The reason given by Heritage Victoria was that Joe's suit contained large amounts of lead, and the piece found in the bush contains no lead, so they cannot be the same. The test results from Ansto clearly state that the lead found on Joes suit was from a bullet impact, made after World War I. The bullet impression contains lead, tin and tungsten. Tungsten was only used post WW1 in ballistics. The metal piece found in the bush contains no lead because it was removed from the suit, using a chisel, which has also been recovered, prior to being worn at Glenrowan. The breastplate was to long and impeded Joe's movement, and probably prevented him easily mounting a horse, or walking freely. Further testing, and analysis of previous test results is now being undertaken independently and the results will be published some time between August and October 2010’

This last paragraph was an edit that was added in August 2010, by someone calling himself Woolshed Jack! Fortunately the original ANSTO report is available on the net and can be read HERE. It was published in 2004. If you read it carefully  you will realise that Woolshed Jack has either deliberately misrepresented the report, or else he has completely failed to understand it.

What happened was this : ANSTO tested the Breastplate in several places,and they also tested the helmet, back plate, side plates and lap plate, and in addition they tested a small peculiar circular area on the front of the breastplate they called the ‘mark’. For completeness they also tested the back of the breast plate immediately behind the “mark”. What their tests showed was that the “mark” was “an impregnation of lead in the steel, consistent with the impact of a lead projectile, perhaps a low velocity bullet.” Traces of Tungsten in the mark indicated that this bullet had been fired at the breast plate long after the Gang had been destroyed, because Tungsten wasn’t used in bullets until WWI.  Woolshed Jack was completely off the mark when he wrote for Wikipaedia  “The reason given by Heritage Victoria was that Joe's suit contained large amounts of lead, and the piece found in the bush contains no lead, so they cannot be the same.The test results from Ansto clearly state that the lead found on Joes suit was from a bullet impact ..” 

In fact what ANSTO said was that Joes armour was made from steel that had SMALL amounts of lead in it from the time of its manufacture, not 'LARGE amounts' as stated by Woolshed Jack. At the “mark” , and only there, the lead concentration was very much higher because that tiny area had been “impregnated” with additional lead, most likely from a bullet that was fired into the breastplate at or after the time of WWI. If as Woolshed Jack states, the Sutton steel had NO lead in it, then THAT would be the reason why ANSTO determined it was not part of the moldboard steel that Joes breastplate was made from – every single piece of Joes armour that they tested had small amounts of lead in it, but , like many other types of steel made back then, Suttons piece didn’t have ANY. Nothing to do with the lead Bullet. An unequivocal result. End of story.

Actually this find is also mentioned in Paul Terrys book  'The True Story of  Ned Kelly’s Last Stand' published in 2012, 2 years after Woolshed Jack announced results would be available in late 2010. Terry mentions the negative finding of the scientists who analyzed the Sutton steel, but, in words that echo Woolshed Jack quotes Sutton as saying  ‘the metal testing was flawed and further testing would prove he was right.' 

"Its about putting history right” says Sutton.In fact, the testing was not flawed - it was thorough and professional. The flaw is in Suttons understanding and interpretation of the results, as Ive described above.

And what has happened to the results of his ‘further testing’ , due out five years ago that would prove ‘he was right’? I would hazard a guess and say that 'Woolshed Jack' is Darren Sutton, and the independent tests that he arranged didn’t give him the results that he wanted, so he has quietly ignored them. Theres little doubt in my mind that if his independent tests had proved his point, those results would have been trumpeted throughout the entire Kelly world. The fact they haven’t tells the story. It would seem that inspite of what the science is telling him, he refuses to concede he is wrong about that piece of metal. But if he’s fair dinkum when he talks about “putting history right” he is five years late, and he needs to go back to Wikipedia, re-do his Edit, explain that the ANSTO testing was not flawed and tell every one what the results of his independent tests were. 

He also needs to go to the Kelly Vault and tell them to change their display of his findings to reflect the truth about his piece of steel. If it becomes widely known that one item on display is not what it claims to be, why should anyone believe any of the others are?  Maybe that table is  fake? Maybe the gun is? And if there are other places where he has spread this nonsense about ANSTO having got it wrong, he needs to go there as well and correct the record.

This does not mean that  Darren Sutton cannot  display his interesting finds or speculate on their origins, but - lets call it for what it is - its a lie, to say "beyond doubt this piece of unremarkable metal is in fact an offcut from Joe Byrnes breastplate” Lies are not what people expect to read in their Museums. Suttons steel is not an off cut from Joes armour and so, sadly for Mr Sutton it wasn’t the greatest Kelly discovery in 50 years.  But his story could still be told, and be far better told openly and honestly as an example of one mans passion as an amateur historian for Kelly artefacts and relics, and the frustrations entailed in the search, the way in which Science helps to prove or disprove our hopes and dreams. Instead, the way it is now, for some it harmfully undermines true science in favour of personal subjective belief, is actually a story of the way in which tunnel vision can over-ride logic, clear thinking and rational thought and result in people advocating things that are demonstrable nonsense; Embarrassing for the man, embarrassing and damaging for the Museum. A Lose-lose when it could so easily be a Win-Win. Wheres the Vaults imagination and creativity gone?

The really important point here is about integrity. Publicly funded Museums are not places for trivial entertainment, or for the advancement of private agendas about history, but serious and important places where Science should be respected and honoured. In Museums people expect to be educated about our history, to learn about what is known and also what is unknown, what is theory and what is speculation, what is true and what is untrue. People who visit Museums trust the professionalism of the Curator to tell them the truth, and not to pull the wool over their eyes as might happen if they visited a Creationist Museum in the USA.  Its not enough to have visitors tick the Box and say they think it was a great Museum - the Curator needs to know that what visitors go away with is accurate and reliable information, genuine insight and understanding and that the objects they’ve seen and wondered at are really what they are claimed to be. If Curators don’t adhere scrupulously to basic principles of honesty and integrity and openness in their Museums, people will leave thinking they’ve been entertained and informed but instead they’ve  been misinformed, they’ve been had. Ultimately, as people realise they’ve been ‘had’ the reputation of the museum will be trashed.

I am sad to say thats whats happening now at the Kelly Vault- people are going away thinking the Kelly Republic of North East Victoria was the inspiration for the Kelly Gangs murderous spree in 1880,and believing they saw an off-cut from Joe Byrnes armour. Well, it wasn’t, and they didnt, and these two problems need to be fixed. If they aren’t, then the Vaults credibility is eroded, and its status is reduced to shrine, and wacky side-show rather than something that supports the tone and the serious commitment to History so evident in the Burke Museum itself, in the Courthouse and other sites in the Cultural and Historic Precinct at Beechworth. 


For me, Kelly myths and dodgy artefacts spoil the Kelly Vault - I found myself starting to wonder if I should trust all that was written there, if some of the other artefacts were genuine or just facsimiles...However ordinary tourists would not spot these things, and probably come away impressed, which for some in the Kelly World is all that matters. For others though, like Bill and me, accuracy, honesty and historical truth are more important. Matt Shore, Kelly Vault curator what group are you in?

The Kelly Vault Can do Better

The Kelly Vault calls itself a History Museum, and is dedicated to the preservation of Kelly history. I was encouraged to see  this quote from the Manager of the Burke Museum on their Facebook Page  “We are not a SHRINE. We are a MUSEUM” Also on their Facebook Page there is a reference a to an ABC interview with Doug Morrissey and in another place mention of Doug Morrisseys 2015 publication “Ned Kelly : A lawless Life” – along with a single negative comment about it -  so I thought I could discern a willingness by the people running the Vault to at least attempt some sort of even handedness.I felt quite positive about the Vault.

Not so long ago I visited the Museum. Its housed in an historic  little four room building known as the old “Sub-Treasury building” on Ford St in the Historic and Cultural Precinct of Beechworth.  Its right next door to the Beechworth Courthouse the place where Ned Kelly’s commital hearings took place for the murder of Lonigan.  You can stand in the very dock where Ned stood and remember that well known etching of him standing there, holding his lapel with his left hand, full beard quite neatly trimmed.  But don’t forget Ellen Kelly also stood there once, and Standish, Fitzpatrick, Sir Redmond Barry, Gaunson, McIntyre and a host of other Kelly identities have also stood or sat somewhere in that room which you are free to explore at your leisure. (Incidentally, as you do so, and listen to the broadcast of audio re-enactments of snippets of court activities, see how good your Kelly knowledge is and identify the major factual mistake in one of them – and post it in Comments if you do!!   Frankly I was so surprised when I heard it the first time I couldn’t believe my ears so I had to listen through the entire tape again to make certain. God only knows how many Kelly buffs have heard that tape and missed it!)

The door to the Cell where Harry Power was kept

Straight across the road is the Town Hall, another building that Ned Kelly would have been familiar with, and around the back of it you can enter the Cell that once held Harry Power! And looking up the road you see the grim walls of the Beechworth Gaol. All in all it’s the most concentrated bit of Kellyana anywhere. 

But back to the vault: In the first room there are three posters labelled “Time Line of Key events in the life of Edward ‘Ned’ Kelly”. Whoever wrote them did a great job of sticking to the important facts, and avoiding the temptation to inject value judgements and subliminal messages about Ned being a victim or the Police being corrupt. The basic story is presented in a very fair way, and after reading the Time Line, I was looking forward to viewing the Collection. 

The prize possession of the Vault would have to be the gun called Betty. It’s the one Ned Kelly stole from someone when he held up the Bank at Euroa, and is on prominent display. There’s also a table top supposed to have been rescued from the Ann Jones Inn, an original Ned Kelly death mask, pages from the original manuscripts of Ian Jones Kelly biography and Peter Careys Kelly novel , the Kelly “armour” worn by Mick Jagger, the Sydney Nolan painting that looks like it was done with spray cans a Kelly tragic paid around $170,000 for, other guns, …and so on. Certainly there’s plenty there to keep any Kelly buff engaged for a good while. 

But – and I know you were all expecting this from me - but, yes, there are problems, some of them minor like my disappointment that the man behind the desk knew nothing about one of the other rifles on display – it was unlabeled, lying next to some farming equipment that once belonged to Aaron Sherrit ( I think it was). And I didn’t believe him when I asked if the documents on display, such as the Arrest Warrant for Dan Kelly were the real thing or facsimiles and he said they were all real. (Can someone confirm that?)

But there are major problems as well. 

The first of these is that the professional objective factual approach adopted in “The Time Line” is abandoned in the Explanatory notes that are attached to many of the exhibits, and yes, it’s the old Jones-Kelly Mythology that is injected into the narrative without the slightest hint that the backgrounder information provided might be pure speculation.  Heres  an example : In the Time Line it accurately says of the Fitzpatrick Incident  “April 15^th 1878  The Fitzpatrick Incident takes place resulting in the arrest of Ned’s mother…”  But elsewhere in the Museum in the explanatory attached to the (real or facsimile?) arrest warrant for Dan, even though all writers seem to disagree on exactly what happened it says  “Fitzpatrick made a clumsy advance towards 14 year old Kate Kelly and a brawl erupted” Why pick that description rather than the ones which suggest Kate had no involvement of that kind at all? Remember Ned saying that if Fitzpatrick had molested his sister Victoria wouldn’t have been big enough to hide him? Or instead, why not insert Molony’s allegation that Kate was raped?  The point is, in a museum, unless it’s a Private Museum dedicated to pushing one particular line – such as to Glorify the dear Leader Kim Jong Il - if no one is really sure what happened, the uncertainty should be made clear. Museums are not there to make up stories but to tell us about what is known, and about what is unknown. Where they wish to speculate - and it can be perfectly legitimate to do so - it should be made clear.

Heres another example : of Neds trial, the time line accurately says this:

“28-29^th October : Neds trial is held at the Supreme Court in Melbourne. Judge Sir Redmond Barry presides. Ned is found guilty of Lonigans murder and is sentenced to death”

But elsewhere in the Museum, accompanying that famous engraving of Ned in the Dock in Beechworth (Real or facsimile?) it says this about Neds trial:

“Ned was incompetently defended and virtually at the mercy of his Judge, Sir Redmond Barry who wanted to rush the trial through in a single day”.

Now, the statement that Ned was incompetently defended, and at the mercy of the Judge is a matter of opinion, but the claim that Neds trial was rushed is simply wrong. This notion remains popular among Kelly sympathisers who remain determined not to acknowledge that it was refuted as far back as 1967, at the Symposium whose deliberations were published in the book “ Ned Kelly Man and Myth”. But even if they hadn’t read the book, if someone from the Vault had bothered just to go next door to the Courthouse they would have read this  “A typical murder trial in Beechworth in those days took from one to two hours!”

Heres another example : in keeping with the Timelines adherence to the facts, the Republic of North East Victoria isn’t mentioned. However in the display about Glenrowan it says this:

“In June 1880 the Kelly Gang planned a pre-emptive strike against their Police enemies – first step in creating the republic of North East Victoria that would win justice for the Kellys and all the folk of the North East who had supported them.”

And later it says “..they would move on Benalla, rob the Bank of New South Wales and proclaim the Republic”

In the display referencing the Kelly Armour it says this : “In the early months of 1880 as the Kelly outbreak gained momentum into a full blown rebellion the gang and their inner circle were plotting their climactic event – the declaration of a Republic in North East Victoria”

In another place, a poster about Ned Kellys Jerilderie Letter says “perhaps most importantly it forshadows his attempt to establish a republic in the colonies north east".

Nowhere in the Kelly Vault could I find even the slightest hint that the notion of a Republic of North east Victoria might be something other than a well established fact. I defy anyone to tell me that an uninformed tourist who visited the Vault, such as the Dutch family who were there when I was, after reading the information displayed would take away anything other than a firm belief that a plan to establish a Republic of North east Victoria was an established part of Australian history. What would they think and how would they feel about the Vault if later they learned  the truth about the Republlic of North East Vicoria, which is that its an idea that’s almost completely without foundation? Nowhere in the Kelly Vault is there anything like an acknowledgement that the Republic of North east Victoria is actually the controversial pet theory developed nearly 50 years ago by the Vaults “Historical Consultant" Mr Ian Jones ,and is an idea which was never mentioned by Ned Kelly? How many people leaving the Vault would believe that The Republic of North East Victoria wasn’t mentioned even once in the numerous speeches Kelly made to Hostages, in any of his many letters,  by any of his supporters, it was not heard about by Police spies who infiltrated the Gang, it was not discussed at Ned Kellys trial, its not supported by any documentation such as the fondly dreamed of but never found ‘Declaration', or the elusive Notebook of Minutes, and is an idea which is contradicted by almost every deed and act and word of Ned Kelly’s during his entire lifetime? 

The Kelly Vaults support and unqualified promotion of the flimsy Jones-Kelly Myth about the Republic of North East Victoria is unprofessional and ought to be damaging to its reputation. Its clear from the fact that Ian Jones was there at the opening of the Vault, that his name is first on the list at the Vault entrance of Acknowledgements offered to supporters of the vault, by the quotes of Ian Jones posted in the Vault itself, and by the content of the display information, that he had a dominating influence on the way in which the Vault tells the Kelly story, just as he influenced the way Peter Fitzsimons told the story in his 2013 book.

Clearly Ian Jones wields enormous power in the Kelly world around Beechworth, and equally clearly, nobody dares challenge it. Further proof of this might be in the fact that in the many bookshops and places in Beechworth where Kelly material is sold, its impossible to find a copy of Ian MacFarlanes book The Kelly Gang Unmasked, or of Doug Morrisseys book, A Lawless Life, but Fitzsimons book is available and of course  at many places you can buy Ian Jones latest, The Kellys and Beechworth.

So here is the challenge for the Kelly Vault and for Matt Shore who appears to be its main promotor : do you want the Kelly Vault to be a worthy Museum that tells the Kelly story without fear or favour, with integrity and respect for honesty and openness? Or are you going to allow it continue to promote the dodgy Jones-Kelly Myths, and be part of Ian Jones determination to silence anyone who dares question him, and become simply another vehicle for the promotion of his private fantasy about Ned Kelly, a virtual Private Museum? If thats what you’re going to do then maybe Ian Jones and his supporters, and maybe Joanne Griffiths and people like Noeleen Lloyd  and the Kelly family should be the ones funding it, not the State Government. Its not the job of the Government to fund private hobbies. 

I am not asking the Vault to tell the story MY way, but its Kelly sympathisers who keep on insisting the  Jury is still out on Ned Kelly.'Man or Myth? Hero or Villain?'  it says right at the entrance to the Vault on a Ned Kelly Adventure Camps poster which describes the Museum as “ Our new museum"! But if thats what they believe why aren’t they putting the other side of the argument to the public as well? In fact, not putting the other side of the argument in the Museum, and heavily promoting the Jones-Kelly myths alone proves what I have been arguing all along, that this "Hero or Villain” argument is not a sincere argument but a tactic of the Kelly Sympathisers. 

At the moment, the Vault is more of a Shrine than a Museum. I am so disappointed.

In Part Two of this post, I will expose another problem at the Vault.