I downloaded from The Internet Movie Archive the first Australian motion picture (1946) — "The Overlanders". It's about driving millions of cattle from the Northern Territory to Queensland in 1942 to deny possible Japanese invasion food while maintaining a large flow of meat to Allied armed forces. An interesting story with non-professional actors in many of the featured parts.

Okay, to my question. The men have a pouch on their belts. Every man has one, but I do not see anyone open the pouch for whatever is inside. My first thought was the pouches held compasses. But every man? That's a lot of compasses. The motion picture makes it clear that these are not pouches for .303 British ammunition for the one or two rifles on the cattle drive. I specifically do not refer to the obvious folding knives' pouches. The mystery pouches resemble those for Brunton pocket transits or for containing cans of chewing tobacco.

So anyone who recognizes these circumstances of a desperation cattle drive across 1500 miles of Australian desert in 1942, please inform me what is in the pouches and for what purpose it serves.

I don't know either,but I will recommend another Aussie movie, this one in WW1, The Light horsemen.

The Overlanders is a "must see" movie.

Sorry, I don't have a clue about the pouches. I will ask a military historian friend of mine.

The Light Horseman is a great movie too. That was a hell of a charge at the end. "They're under the guns!".

I can't remember the pouches but my father used to carry a pocket watch in a belt pouch on our grazing property. Until the 1920s Australians could carry pistols, too (my grandfather took one to the Western Front in 1916 but lent it to someone on night patrol who did not come back).

As to the first Australian movie, it was 'The Story of the Kelly Gang' (1906) - also remembered as the first full-length feature film made anywhere in the world.

Just an educated guess...

Pouches worn on the belt would be either tobacco pouches or money pouches. No cowboy is going to stop and dig in a saddle roll for a smoke or sit on a wallet 17 hours a day in the saddle, nor is he going to take the chance his money slips out of a pocket or saddle roll and is lost on the trail. Best to keep the important stuff strapped to you.

quote:

Originally posted by sambarman338:
I can't remember the pouches but my father used to carry a pocket watch in a belt pouch on our grazing property. Until the 1920s Australians could carry pistols, too (my grandfather took one to the Western Front in 1916 but lent it to someone on night patrol who did not come back).

As to the first Australian movie, it was 'The Story of the Kelly Gang' (1906) - also remembered as the first full-length feature film made anywhere in the world.

I stand corrected on "first movie". Possibly the first full length talkie?

The movie is about civilian ranchers and shippers in Northern Territory "scorching the earth" and moving several thousand (representing millions) cattle overland to Queensland to deny all of value to invading Imperial Japanese army. Overland cattle drive occurred during the dry part of 1942, creating difficulty.

No featured actor has a handgun. Perhaps taking place in 1942, handguns were restricted or banned or of no use to ranchers living in the outback?

Thanks, Naphtali. Some old movies used to show our stockmen with holsters, usually with buttoned-down flaps (so they may have contained toilet paper).

I guess the need for pistols would be much the same in the NT as Montana. They don't have bears or pumas but there could be crocs, taipans, buffalo, dingoes and feral pigs, donkeys and camels, as well as injured cattle beasts, of course.

Thanks for the heads up, Naphtali. I'll look for "The Overlanders."

quote:

Originally posted by sambarman338:
Thanks, Naphtali. Some old movies used to show our stockmen with holsters, usually with buttoned-down flaps (so they may have contained toilet paper).

I guess the need for pistols would be much the same in the NT as Montana. They don't have bears or pumas but there could be crocs, taipans, buffalo, dingoes and feral pigs, donkeys and camels, as well as injured cattle beasts, of course.

I trust that you were correct regarding need of the convenience of having a handgun on your person. As decades passed, need for protection on your person changed. Apparently Australia reverted?? to English-style weaponry and usage as much as Australian living conditions allowed, while America made no such reversion - rather its reverse.

Yes, Naphtali, it is different here. We can have pistols but not for self-defence (unless in certain risky occupations). Some of my friends have had them but the mandated attendance at their target club got too tedious. Until about 30 years ago we could have cap-and-ball revolvers without even needing a permit, and I was thinking of getting a Ruger stainless .44, but then some crim killed someone with one a couple of streets away and the penny finally dropped for the Government.

I don't care too much. When I carried a revolver while hunting in Wyoming, it tended to drag my trousers down. On a philosophical level, though, I wonder if there is some Macbethian existential question with non-target pistols that defeats reason in some personalities.

That said, if I were a stockman in the NT, I'd wish I had one.