SYDNEY TOWN HALL RIOT

Taranaki Daily News, 17 February 1931, Page 7

SYDNEY TOWN HALL RIOT

PROTEST MEETING ROUTED

COMMUNISTS’ DISTURBANCE

FIGHTS THREATEN PANIC

TERRIFIED. WOMEN FLEE

By Telegraph—Press Assn.—Copyright. Rec. 1.25 a.m. Sydney, Feb. 16. The widely-advertised meeting, at the Sydney Town Hall to-night to protest against the proposals of the New South Wales Government for the repudiation of national obligations was completely broken up by Communists and others who had been apparently deliberately organised to that end. They distributed themselves in various parts of the huge hall where the police were unable to deal promptly with them.

Riotous scenes such as never before were witnessed nearly caused. a panic. On several occasions fights occurred in the body of the hall and on the platform. The police were kept busy throwing the disturbers out. One young man attempted to assist an official to eject a well-known Communist when he was set upon and punched unmercifully. Women screamed and rushed to the exits. While free fights went on among the audience rioters invaded the platform, counted out Mr. T. R. Bavin (Leader of the Opposition), called for cheers for Mr. J. T. Lang (Premier) and created the utmost pandemonium. The meeting had to be closed long before it was intended. Only one resolution of protest was actually carried. This resolution deplored “that the name of this State should bp officially associated with a policy which is morally disgraceful and financially disastrous.” .

Over two thousand citizens were present and the hundreds unable to gain admission regarded themselves as extremely lucky.

NOW QUESTION OF POLITICS

LONDON CHARY OF INTERFERENCE.

THEODORE PLAN CONDEMNED.

London, Feb. 15.

A financial commentator Writes that since the proposals for the rehabilitation pf Australian finance are now a question of politics rather than finance it is difficult to. pronounce on the subject without entering the political arena. Bankers and financiers here are disinclined towards public utterances, being most chary of the appearance of unwarrantable interference in what a section of Australian opinion miglit regard as largely a domestic concern.

Nevertheless, financial opinion in .London definitely condemns Mr. Theodore’s proposals scarcely less than Mir. Lang’s, though after the first shock the latter are realised to be iiiipossible. The City argues thus:—• (1) The Commonwealth is in sore straits through the world slump in commodity prices, coupled with tjie orgy of borrowing from 1922 io 1928. (2) The operating of economic laws blocks the royal road to prosperity, arid the only exit is drastic cuts in Government expenditure, a reduction in national costs of production and the abandonment of the traditional policy of overseas borrowing. (3) While Australian politicians fa«J to face Realities they cannot be helped, and thus far their utterances indicate that they are too frightened by their constituencies to adopt drastic measures, or are not capable of realising the situation, and London, pending an alteration in the position, cannot offer any assistance, which it would otherwise give most willingly. (4) Whatever were Mr. Scullin’s motives for reinstating Mr. Theodore, it has greatly damaged his prestige here, since financiers are already familiar with Mr. Theodore’s views and have always regarded them as utterly Ufisound, apart altogether from the political consideration.