19.06.2013 Views

Arbeit macht frei: - Fredrick Töben

Arbeit macht frei: - Fredrick Töben

Arbeit macht frei: - Fredrick Töben

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Continuing his travels to Bridgewater, Grünthal and Hahndorf he came to<br />

Mount Barker where he criticised the local newspaper, the Mount Barker<br />

Courier, severely. He scoffed at the ‘freedom of the press’ concept because,<br />

in my view, journalism should influence the moral development of public<br />

opinion, which means ensuring the mental development of society.<br />

At Nairne he noted the much-anticipated construction of the intercolonial<br />

railway line between Adelaide and Melbourne. Other settlements visited<br />

included Kanmantoo, Callington, Woodside, Balhannah and Oakbank. He<br />

returned to Adelaide via Grünthal, Bridgewater, Stirling, Glen Osmond and<br />

the zig-zag Mt Lofty pass.<br />

On 20 October 1880 Graf Anrep-Elmpt attended the Supreme Court at<br />

Adelaide where Chief Justice Samuel Way, a diminutive figure with an alert<br />

mind, and the Attorney-General, W.H. Bundy, together with 12 members<br />

of the jury, were ready to hear his claim over the lost luggage. The<br />

defendant, Howard Smith & Son, wanted a closed hearing and so the court<br />

was closed to the public. Messrs Stewart and Downson were the barristers<br />

in the case, which Anrep-Elmpt wins. An advance from his solicitor, Mr<br />

Wallace, enables the Graf to continue his travels through Australia.<br />

* * * * *<br />

Parliamentary Musings about Implied Justice<br />

Fast forward from 1880 to the House of Assembly on 9 May 1956 when<br />

Members of Parliament are in a question and answer session. Tom Stott, as<br />

is the custom, makes a statement, then follows it up with a question:<br />

Recently a country district council took action against a farmer for having<br />

vermin on his property. The thought he had removed all vermin from the<br />

property, but the case went to the court and his defence was that he had<br />

done everything possible to remove rabbits on the property. The farmer<br />

won the case in the lower court and a high court subsequently ruled in<br />

favour of the district council because, as the Act was worded, the inspector<br />

was within his rights. Obviously, there is a grave anomaly if a farmer does<br />

everything possible to remove vermin, but because a few rabbits may<br />

climb over the wire netting or jump a fence an inspector may find one or<br />

two on the property and take action. Will the Minister of Agriculture<br />

investigate this matter, and does the government intend to amend the Act<br />

to make its administration more flexible so that both farmers and<br />

inspectors may work together more amicably?<br />

238

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!