The New Zealand Times. TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 22, 1925. SPOILS TO THE VICTORS

New Zealand Times, Volume LII, Issue 12249, 22 September 1925, Page 6

The New Zealand Times. TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 22, 1925. SPOILS TO THE VICTORS

With the reins of office firmly in its hands, the Labour Administration in New South Wales is setting a merry pace. It promises to give itself a regular John Gilpin ride before it reaches the end or its tether. One of Mr Lang’s first tasks was to make changes in- important official positions. The retirement of the Comptroller of Prisons caused a mild sensation. Ihe “reasons” offered for that change were grotesquely unconvincing. The latest illustration of the application of the spoils-to-the-victors policy of Mr Lang is the enforced resignation of the State Agent-General in London, Sir Arthur Cocks. So far as can be gathered at this distance, Sir Arthur’s crime was that he was apf ointed by, and belonged to, the party which is opposed to Labour, t was a further misdemeanour on his part that he had proved an unsparing critic of Labour’s political manner and methods inside and outside the House. Naturally, such a man would be marked down as a fit object for reprisals when the opportunity came. It has come, and Sir Arthur Cocks goes. Spoils to the victors! In a certain class of Labour there is to be found no sign of generosity—except to itself. One of Mr Lang’s predecessors, the late Mr John Storey, was a notable exception. There was no vindictiveness about John Storey. Apparently Mr Lang is made ot sterner, more implacable stuff. He will teach his opponents a lesson in political ethics. He will teach them what to expect of Labour when it becomes the top dog. We have said that a certain type of Labour can be generous only to itself. An example was published in our cable columns yesterday. “The Parliamentary Labour Caucus,” the message ran, “his decided that the salaries of members of the Assembly shall be increased from £6OO to £875 per annum as from June 30th last.” It is no justification of that “steal” that it is only on all-fours with the one which happened in the Federal Parliament some years ago. In neither instance were the electors consulted. When Mr Lang and his following were entrusted with the State’s affairs, their salary was £6OO a year. They were not in command but a month or two when they met and agreed to raise their emoluments by £5 a week. Obviously they are determined not to let the cost of living worry them. Just as obviously, having laid hands on the key of the administrative pantry, they intend to make the most of things while they may. Like marauding boys among the jams, the New South Wales Labourites are helping themselves liberally to what is known as the sweets of office. That is to say, they are “doing themselves well”—at the people’s expense. That may be human nature—in a Labour politician. But, at least, the raiders might have had the decency not to have rushed the Treasury in this hungry fashion.