CASH IN TREASURY

Dominion, Volume 25, Issue 145, 15 March 1932, Page 9

CASH IN TREASURY

Withdrawal from Banks i MR. LANG’S £1,000,000 “Beyond Federal Reach” By Telegraph—Press Assn. —Copyright. Sydney, March 14. The amount withdrawn from the banks by the State Government on Saturday has been deposited in the New South Wales Treasury and the ordinary Treasury police guard has been strengthened. The bunk authorities admit -that £750,000 was withdrawn by the Government from the Bank of New South Wales and £250,000 from the Commercial Bank, though Mr. Jarvie, Nationalist member of the State Assembly, who made the first announcement, maintains that he was informed the latter withdrawal was £400,000. The "Daily Telegraph” says that It is suggested that the State Government withdrew the money from the banks to forestall the Garnishee Bib passed by the Commonwealth Senate on Friday. "If this is the case, the object of the move no doubt is to embarrass the Federal Government by attempting to put the money beyond its reach. There is no need for the public to feel alarmed if anything of the kind has happened. In the long run, of course, the taxpayers will have to pay the cost of the fight between the Commonwealth and tne State Government.” The “Telegraph” adds that a trine of £1.150,000 will not go far in running New South Wales. It the State Government about a year to carry on, including £8.000,000 for Interest payments. TREASURY SECRECY Presumed Sources of Money (Rec. March 14, 8.25 p.m.) Sydney, March 14. Treasury officials arc preserving the utmost secrecy with regard to the withdrawal of the £1,150.000, which is more than sufficient to meet the months salaries and wages. It is presumed that the money represents income tax, railway, and tramway revenue, and lottery receipts. The Government has not disclosed its plans for carrying on without the usual banking facilities, and persons handling its cheques are likely to experience inconvenience.

ENFORCEMENT OF LAW

Prime Minister’s Comment

Sydney, March 14. The Federal Prime Minister, Mr. J. A. Lyons, commenting .on the State Government’s action, said It would not In any way prevent the carrying (Out of the Federal law to compel the State to meet its obligations. “Mi. Lang is deluding hinyself,” said Mr. Lyons, "if he thinks that his action is a means of evading the effective weapon that has been forged by the Commonwealth Government to compel him to meet his undertakings.’’ Mr. Lyons added that it would seem that Mr. Lang had sufficient money m the banks after all with which he could have’paid the interest due had be desired to do so.

LONDON COMMENT Commonwealth v. State (Rec. March 14. 10 p.m.) London, March 14. Tire “Guardian,” in a leader, says: “Nobody quite knows how long Mr. Lang will be able to hold out-against the Commonwealth, for a State is a difficult tiling to coerce. Mr. Lyons cannot afford to allow New South Wales finances to be completely shipwrecked in the process of bringing Mr. Lung to heel, or tlie whole object of his policy would be defeated. The controversy has an amusing side, but none the less it is serious, for the soundness of Australian finance and perhaps the whole future of the Dominions is ,at stake.” HAMPERED BY LANG Election the Only Remedy , Sydney, March I’4. Speaking at Wollongong, the Federal Prime Minister. Mr. J. A. Lyons, declared. that the Government’s efforts to restore industry .-'nd. consequently, to remove unempb ent. had been hampered by the I. -g Ministry, and the only absolute remedy be saw was an early New South Wales election.