NEW GUARD LEADER

Evening Star, Issue 21006, 21 January 1932, Page 9

NEW GUARD LEADER

COLONEL CAMPBELL IN COURT CHARGED WITH USING INSULTING WORDS Press Association—By Telegraph—Copyright. SYDNEY, January 20. Colonel Campbell, tho leader of the New Guard, was again before the court on a charge of using insulting words. A vast crowd fought for admission, but only a small percentage was able to get in. Mr Lamb, K.C., counsel who is appearing for Colonel Campbell, asked for a further adjournment, declaring that there had been insufficient time to prepare a defence worthy of such an occasion. Ho added that the vital principle involved was the right of free speech of every citizen to criticise the acts of a public man. “Wo are entitled to show,” he said, “ that the Premier of this State has disgraced his position in every way and has lowered its dignity and injured its credit., He lias worked to bring about a Communistic State, and, above all, he has defaulted. Everybody knows this but ydu. As a magistrate you do not know it.”

The Magistrate (Mr Laidlaw): Assuming that your statements are true, how would you be entitled to go into evidence to substantiate matters of that kind P

Counsel: “Most decidedly I would have that right. A public man has defaulted and holds his position by false pretences. That being his character, wo have every right to criticise him, just as numberless others are doing. Even Mr Lyons, tho Prime Minister, has described Mr Lang as , an incubus. We have likened him to- his own farmyard bull. It may be an insult to the bull, but 1 do not think it is an insult to Mr Lang.” Counsel pointed out that he also intended to submit that the summons was bad because it did not specifically state who had been insulted. He contended that the person insulted must be present at the time that the words complained of were used.

The Magistrate replied that it did not seem necessary to prove to whom the remarks were insulting. Mr Lamb argued, that if Mr Lang had been insulted, then let him come forward so that ho could be crossexamined. No offence had been committed unless someone had been insulted. Who was that someone?

Mr Lamb continued to argue that every word uttered of Mr Lang was justified; indeed, far worse things were being said about him by others, and he desired to bring evidence to this effect.

The magistrate refused to grant an adjournment. Mr Sheahan, who is appearing for the prosecution, said that the police took action for good reasons, which he was not disclosing. Ho added that there was such a thing as the prevention of disorder when arrogant persons set themselves up in positions to which they had no right or title. A police shorthand writer, Sergeant Alexander Lendrum, detailed Colonel Campbell’s speech at Lane Cove Picture Theatre on January 11, in which there were many references to Mr Lang. Witness described the utterances as insulting. During cross-examination witness said he had not attempted to verify Colonel Campbell’s statement that the Premier was a scoundrel. He was also unconcerned whether Mr Lang was a defaulter, whether he had broken his pledges, or whether he had appointed scoundrels and criminals to the Public Service. . '

The magistrate suggested that MiLamb should be more careful regarding the words he used about the Premier of the State.

Mr Lamb: I shall be very careful if 1 cannot prove my words, I submit that “scoundrel” is a very mild word in this case.

Mr Sheahan interposed; These cowardly attacks on the Premier should not be tolerated in a British court of law.

After other similar exchanges the hearing was adjourned.