LAW OR ANARCHY.

Waikato Times, Volume 111, Issue 18622, 28 April 1932, Page 6

LAW OR ANARCHY.

The dispute in Australia between tho Federal authorities and-the Administration of the State of New south Wales strikes hard at- the root of ordered government and can only result in chaos. Mr J. T. Lang and his colleagues shouldered a heavy responsibility when they decided to flout the Federal law. In every self-respecting community the principle that the law must be obeyed is regarded as incontestable. We may not like the law s finding on occasion, but we have to accept it all the same. And there is the strongest possible reason for this general acquiescence. Were every man permitted to be “ a law unto himself,” the result would be anarchy. Force alone would rule. The strong would trample on the weak and all semblance of democratic government would disappear. This is clearly recognised by all good citizens, both in principle and practice. But the duty of obeying the law is not limited in its application. Indeed, it applies with greatest force to Governments and all who exercise high executive functions. There is scope for testing the validity of Acts but once judgment has been delivered there can be no tolerance for active or passive resistance to the findings of the highest court of appeal. Any Government which flouts or resists the law under -such circumstances is guilty of the gravest offence against both the letter and spirit of the Constitution. The Federal Prime Minister In a speech dealing with the crisis, spoke with customary clearness and absence of exaggeration. If, he said, the Government of New South Wales had “ honestly endeavoured to meet its obligations and pay its just debts,” none of the present measures would have been adopted. “ The sole purpose of the present action against Mr Lang and his Government is to ensure that the obligations lie has assumed are met and that the burden is not left for others to carry." Contrast this with the violent attitude assumed by Mr Lang in the Legislative Assembly on March 15, when lie referred to the Financial Agreement Enforcement Act as “invalid” and its purpose as “nefarious.” He predicted that it would not enable the Commonwealth Government to “ collect one penny piece from New South Wales,” and added: “ If the Commonwealth peace officers attempt to usurp the functions of the New South Wales police force they will find themselves In the same position as any other person or body who attempts to usurp the duties or the functions of the Government of New South Wales." This, of course, was flagrant defiance, which no Commonwealth Government could ignore. When, in the development of the crisis, the Federal Government attached sources of revenue and served notices on 1 lie banks —■calling on them to pay to the Commonwealth all money representing balances of the State of New South "Wales—the Premier voiced his grievances. Thore was a nefarious design on tho part of a little antiAustralian coterie in Melbourne,’’ to make and unmake Governments. On Urn previous day, the egregious Mr Baddcley, speaking at Dranxton, declared “ that Hie Government was determined to fight to Hie last ditch to protect the rights of the people from the onslaughts of the capitalistic hordes for which the Lyons Government was being used as ‘ shock troops This is the sort of humbug which our great “ statesman " and his" factotums broadcast for the enlightenment of the gullible I The Federal Government, according to the latest messages is taking steps to enforce the law. and developments will be followed with intense interest by pH Who realise tho principles involved. 11 is gratifying that tho Australian Labour Party has so explicitly and absolutely renounced the policy of Mr Lang and placed itself on tho side of good government.