Some of you may have caught the Quiz Biz Question this week in the Newsletter about:

What were the first two countries that declared war against Germany in WWII?

Well this has really raised an issue with myself, Cordial Russ and now GTO4, and a couple of other subscribers about the "true answer". All in intellectual fun, now.

History timelines give of course, Great Britain and France. September 3, 1939.

The "I Need To Know" is whether Australia could be condsidered the "2nd" country since they were or were not leaglly bound to Great Britain as a "Commonwealth" and since GB declared war, Australia was deemed as the 2nd country.

P.S. Jabberwok, your comments are not only welcomed, but encouraged!

TJ, check out your email

.. img link failed, will try another time

[This message has been edited by gtho4 (edited 08-31-2000).]

I'm not sure of what was already discussed, so maybe I'm repeating information already known. From what I could find out, I am leaning towards the answer that Britain and France were the first two countries. Neville Chamberlain announced that both Britain and France had declared war on Germany on September 3, 1939.
Chamberlain's address to the House of Commons on Sept. 3/1939

I don't think whether Australia is a commonwealth country or not should make a difference. The commonwealth countries, while they may have been obliged to follow Great Britain, still made their own declarations. I found these dates:

Australia declared war on Germany on September 3, 1939.
New Zealand declared on September 3, 1939 also.
South Africa declared war on Germany on September 6, 1939.
Canada didn't declare war until September 10, 1939.
(I couldn't find specific dates on other commonwealth nations and gave up after searching for awhile.)

I also found this site which states that Australia's declaration of war on September 3rd came 45 minutes after Great Britain's: http://www.cofq.qld.gov.au/1930.html

Based on all that, I'd be inclined to say Britain and France were 1st and 2nd, with Australia being a close 3rd (or maybe even 4th depending on how quick New Zealand was to make their announcement.)

I'd be interested to hear what differing information you fellows (TexasJoe, Russ, gtho4) have that prompted this discussion.

Also: Hi there gtho4 (waving across 5,000 miles or so). I'll be looking for you and other Australian FunTriviaites in the stands when I start watching the Olympics on TV shortly.

------------------
I not only use all the brains I have, but all I can borrow. (Woodrow Wilson)

[This message has been edited by Astrix (edited 09-01-2000).]

hiya Astrix, how's my mate the gem from Canada! keep an eye out at the opening and closing ceremonies, and a few of the athletics finals - I'll smuggle in some cardboard and if the camera pans to where we're sitting, the message on the cardboard will be instantly recognisable by everyone at FT

this debate about declaration of war will come down to actual authority or ostensible authority to make the declaration of war. Our head of state, our sovereign (and yours in Canada, I think), is Queen Elizabeth. In 1939 we had a King. So if England declared war in 1939, one school of thought is that we cannot have the King of England at war as the sovereign of the UK, and on the other hand not at war as the sovereign of Australia non sequitur. Another school of thought is that the King of England can wear different hats in his respective sovereign capacities, and that one nation can be at war and another may not (until its head of government otherwise advises its sovereign). I think that's where you're coming from in your post.

The legislation which gave independence to members of the British Empire was the Staute of Westminster Act 1931 (passed by the UK parliament). However, it was not adopted in Australia, aka passed into law by the Australian Parliament, until eleven years later in 1942. This means that in 1939 we, as a nation, were incapable of having a foreign policy which was at odds with that of the UK.

On this basis, the radio broadcast by our PM Robert Mensies (later Sir Robert) on the evening of 03-Sep-1939 would be an announcement that we were at war, the declaration of war per se having been made 45 minutes earlier (nice bit of research finding that one), on our behalf. There wasn't a person in Australia capable of making such a declaration until 1942, at the earliest: see for example the summary at www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/rp/1999-2000/2000rp15.htm (if you get a moment, Astrix, jump over to to Trivia Shootout thread in Fun & Games, and have a look at Q145)

This matters of authority and sovereignty were thrashed out prior to our referendum on becoming a republic back in November 1999, without ever being resolved, so that we all understood who we were, where we'd been, and where we were going. At times the debate got down to, believe or not, this: who is our head of state, is it Queen Elizabeth, the sovereign of the UK, as Queen of Australia, or is it the Governor-General who, in accordance with our constitution, is the crown's representive in Australia whilstsoever she is not here (during the Royal Visit back in March this year our PM and the G-G welcomed the Queen to Australia when she arrived, and then the G-G disappeared for a few weeks until she left). At one stage the debates got down to one single issue - the only power the Queen now has in Australia, under our constitutional monarchy, is to appoint and dismiss her representative on the advice of her Australian PM (for our friends in the USA and other republics, a monarch acts only on the advice of her PM, the head of government).

Anyway, enough of that, as I digress. The answer to the question posted by TJ seems to be that Australia was at war the instant England was at war .. anybody else wanna jump in .. next

If I understand this correctly then, the question is not the exact time-line to the minute or hour as to when Great Britain, France and Australia announced or declared they were at war; but rather whether the timing of Australia's announcement should even matter -- as they were tied to Great Britain and whether they announced war or not, they were already at war the minute Great Britain announced same?

Hmmmm.. seems like we could use a History Professor here. I read the article you noted, gtho4, but now I ask myself these questions:

- When Chamberlain made his announcement in the House of Commons it seems to me he was announcing a decision made by "His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom" and not "His Majesty King George VI".

- Even though Australia might not have adopted the Statute of Westminster until 1942, the British Parliament had enacted it back in December 1931, recognizing the full equality of all the British dominions. Wouldn't this mean that the United Kingdom could no longer obligate Australia?

- The article you referenced has this bit in it:

quote:

---

It was not until 1942 that the Statute of Westminster was adopted by Australia by the Statute of Westminster Adoption Act 1942 (Cwlth), and given retrospective effect to 3 September 1939.

---

Why was this done? Perhaps to clarify that Australia's announcement on September 3rd was an independent declaration?

P.S. - I'm curious now what your sign reads. I'll probably be too busy scanning the stands now and will miss all the activity on the field. Also if your sign relates to FunTrivia, have you discussed advertising royalties with Terry? - I mean this is international worldwide exposure here.

------------------
I not only use all the brains I have, but all I can borrow. (Woodrow Wilson)

Just correcting a typo - should read George VI (I previously mistyped George IV).

[This message has been edited by Astrix (edited 09-01-2000).]

GTO4, Russ and Astix

Thanks for the excellent research effort! Another fact completely substantiated by FunTrivia Members!

royalties! LOL

what we need, Astrix, is a Professor of History who also has a PhD in constitutional law .. we went to war as a nation back in 39 and seem to have no idea who declared war for us. On much the same tack there is still a raging debate down here as to whether the Governor-General properly exercised his reserve powers, as the Crown's representaive, when he dismissed our PM on 11-Nov-75 .. or whether those powers still existed. The problem is that the Governor-General did it, it happened, and it's history, much like what happened back in 39.

If Parliament decided in 1942 to retrospectively adopt the Statute of Westminster back to 03-Sep-39 then, on that day (as the law then stood), there was no person in Australia able to declare war on or behalf. Legitimising 3 years in arrears the broadcast to the nation by our PM on that evening implies that when His Majesty's Government declared war then Australia was also at war .. hmm this is starting to sound like a debate at Uni with no answer!

After some more digging around, this is what I think was the time-line or sequence of events on 03-Sep-1939:

at 1100hrs BST Great Britain was at war with Germany (*a). The time in Australia would've been 2000hrs 8pm as we did not go onto DST until the early 70s, I think it was 1971 (we might've been on DST during WW2 to conserve energy, but that's just a guess)

at 1115hrs the PM of England broadcasts to the nation (*b)

at 1215hrs the PM of Australia addresses our nation in a radio broadcast (this almost fits in with your research as to the 45 minute time lag, and implies that we couldn't have been on DST during the war); the local time here was 9:15pm (*c)

at 1700hrs France was at war with Germany (*d)

(*a) many sources confirm it was 11am
(*b) www.bbc.co.uk/history/wwtwo/countdown/countdown07.shtml
(*c) www.science.org.au/academy/memoirs/menzies.htm .. and the point of conjecture would be whether our PM was informing us via announcement that we were already at war, or whether this broadcast was the declaration of war per se
(*d) www.bbc.co.uk/history/wwtwo/countdown/countdown07.shtml

If Australia did have the ability to declare war, we did so about 4 1/2 hours before France declared war. If there was no-one on Australian soil who could then we didn't have that ability, and our King did so on our behalf, and we were at war the instant that His Majesty's Government was at war. Whichever one is right, and presuming the above time-line is correct, then France comes in 3rd on both counts and, if you had to choose between these three countries, it looks like the first two countries to declare war were the UK and Australia.

TJ and Russ, how do you read this?
Anybody else want to jump in?

Well, I started all this hullabaloo with the quiz biz question in the Newsletter.

At the time, I only had a quote from the September 3, 1939 Commonwealth Gazette to support the fact that Great Britain spoke for Australia so Australia didn't have to declare war. (But as everyone's research verifies, they did.)

I think GTO4's research is finite enough to establish the fact Australia was 2nd.

TJ,
have you got the actual wording as published in the Commonwealth Government Gazette on 03-Sep-1939? I was never able to find it.

p.s. as you've no doubt gathered, your post of 5.50pm wasn't showing up at the time.

[This message has been edited by gtho4 (edited 09-01-2000).]

Follow This Site...

...It is a great Australian TimeLine.

You will see the "Quote" mid page.

If you have trouble, let me know.

I'm in agreement - Australia is #2, one way or the other.

If anyone is still interested, I found Robert Menzies' address to the Australian people on September 3, 1939:

quote:

---

"It is my melancholy duty to inform you officially that, in consequence of a persistence by Germany in her invasion of Poland, Great Britain has declared war upon her, and that, as a result, Australia is also at war."

---

Also, that same weekend, he made another statement which is part was as follows:

quote:

---

"Great Britain has no interests in this matter which will not also be ours. There is unity in the Empire ranks--one King, one flag, one equal temper of determination, one cause to which the fullest measure of devotion will be paid."

---

While gtho4 is correct in that this seems to be a debate with no answer, I am now inclined the other way to agree that when Great Britain declared war, then Australia was at war at the same time. I agree with gtho4's point that in 1939 Australia was not legally able to make foreign policy decisions independent of Great Britain at that time, even if they gave themselves that right 3 years later retroactively. Also, if Robert Menzies was the acting leader at the time, and it was his belief that Australia was automatically bound by Great Britain's declaration; well, then it seems to me that his beliefs and actions, whether mistaken or not, would define the nature of the announcement that September 3, 1939. Ergo, an announcement and not a separate declaration.

P.S. - website reference for the above quotes: here

[This message has been edited by Astrix (edited 09-01-2000).]