Malan v. Malan
The fact that the South African Prime Minister and the ex- airman who is so successfully organising opposition to the Prime Minister's apartheid policy bear the same surname lends a cer- tain piquancy to the collision between the two. In Capetown on Monday the collision was literal, a considerable number of casualties resulting from a clash between police and onlookers— not, it would appear, the actual demonstrators, who seem to have acted in a completely orderly fashion/ Previous demon- strations against the apartheid legislation have taken place in Johannesburg and other cities, but at Capetown Group Captain Malan achieved a success beyond any that had•marked his pre- vious efforts, the obvious sympathy of the crowd with the proces- sion of ex-servicemen creating a situation which Ministers can manifestly not ignore. The extent to which feelings were stirred was demonstrated in the House of Assembly on Tuesday, when an enquiry into the previous day's rioting was demanded and refused. That a measure constitutionally passed by Parliament (though in this case the constitutionality is very much in ques- tion) should be resisted by resort to public disorder would .be deplorable. But Monday's disorder was essentially incidental. What has been most impressive about the ex-servicemen's demonstrations has been their extreme orderliness. Public opinion has been expressing itself in the only way it can. Ministers who choose to ignore the manifestations must bear responsibility for their obduracy. It must not be forgotten that though Dr. Malan secured a majority of seats at the last election he did not secure a majority of votes ; and all the indications are that he would secure fewer today than he did then.
Previous page
