A sequel to SA A1980, & to the rebuttal appearing in Mens en Maatschappij, 1962, 57, by J. F. Glashra van Loon & E. W. Vercruijsse. An attempt is made to explain once more Wertheim's view of legislation as influencing society by indirect, psychol'al motivation. Most of the scholars who have tried to assess the impact of law on society have not sufficiently succeeded in freeing themselves from a normative, legalistic outlook. Even where recent legal measures are involved, the psychol'al effects on society may be very complicated. Recent agrarian reform in certain parts of India which resulted in large scale eviction of tenants is referred to. The existing soc structure granting a few landowning castes an overwhelming power in Ru society determined this effect of the reform legislation. An attempt is made to assess to what extent Wertheim's opponents were right in stating that the main function of law is to provide a structural frame to society. While this aspect is of importance, Wertheim can not agree with an identification of the legal frame with the structure of society. Such a view wrongly takes the legal frame for soc reality. Society shows many structural elements which are not legally determined. On the other hand, in as far as norms are operative, they can only be so through their mental acceptance in society or in definite layers of it. Legislation may influence human society by mentally imposing certain norms on the members of society & on the admin'ive apparatus. But other structural & hierarchical value systems may also persist within society & provide a kind of counterpoint to the dominant system of norms & values. Only by taking account of these contrapuntal elements within each society can we develop a sense for soc dynamics, including the phenomenon of revolution. (See also SA A1960, 1636-B2923 & -B2925). Modified AA.
