NEW GUARD LEADER

Greymouth Evening Star, 11 March 1932, Page 7

NEW GUARD LEADER

JUDGE UPHOLDS APPEAL. [BY CABLE —PBESS ASSN. —COPYEIGHT.] SYDNEY, March 10. In the appeal case, Colonel Eric Campbell (leader of the New Guard), sought that prohibition be directed to Magistrate Laidlaw and Police-Ser-geant Landrim, -against the enforcement of the decision in the Lower Court, imposing a fine of £2 Gs, with costs, for using insulting language. .... Mr. Justice K. W. Street, sitting m Chambers, ruled that it was not necessary for him to decide whether the words complained of were insulting. It was common ground that, if they were insulting,- they were insulting to one individual only, and the one individual in respect of whom they were in? suiting, was not present, when Campbell used the words. Mr. Justice Street held that the case was governed by the decision of the state Full Court in 1918, ex parti, Breen 18, State Law reports. In that case, the words complained of were used at a meeting in a public street, and referred to a large number, of women workers carrying out war duties. The Chief Justice dealt fully, on that occasion, with the meaning of the word “insulting,’ ’as used in the Vagrancy Act. He laid it down.in law as follows: —“I cannot regard the enactment going further than providing a penalty for those who violate public order by language calculated to hurt the personal feelings of individuals, whether the words are addressed directly to themselves or used in their hearing or in regard to their own character, or that of persons closely associated to them.” Mr. Justice Street added that the Magistrate (Mr. Laidlaw) had relied on a subsequent decision, in the case of Wragge v. Pritchard, State Law reports 279, 1930, where words were uttered in a public street. Plaintiff was not present and did not hear them, but they were heard by bystanders, and two friends. The Full Court decision in this instance supported Mr. Laidlaw’s finding, but Mr. Justice Street preferred to think that the decision in regard to Breen should have been applied in Campbell’s case, particularly as the High Court had refused leave to appeal against it. Therefore, the Campbell appeal was upheld and the order for prohibition made absolute.

The language complained of, for which Campbell was fined in the Lower Court, included the following references to Mr. Lang: “Nasty tyrant and scoundrel, a buffoon at the head of affairs, and a hated old man of the sea.”