Say Calwell Is Enemy Inside Curtin’s Gate

Northern Advocate, 24 April 1944, Page 4

Say Calwell Is Enemy Inside Curtin’s Gate

(Special) SYDNEY, This Day. Developments in the censorship dispute continue to arouse the widest interest. This week the Commonwealth will take court actioh against the “Sydney Morning Herald’’ and Sydney “Daily Telegraph’’ for alleged infringements of the censorship regulations.

Next week the High Court is expected to deal with the newspapers' actions against the Commonwealth for damages suffered in consequence of the prohibition on certain editions of the papers. The validity or invalidity of the Commonwealth censorship regulations is expected to be determined as a result of these proceedings.. While refraining from, discussion on sub judice legal aspects of the dispute, commentators unanimously point out that great democratic principles are involved in the censor’s action in suppressing matter not of a “security” nature. Attitude Of The Press

The “Sydney Morning Herald” editorially summarises the attitude of the Australian newspapers towards censorship by saying: ‘‘The Press asks no more than that except when national security is truly involved, freedom ot expression shall remain as inviolate in time of war as in time of peace.” Interest in the confiscation of the Sydney, Melbourne and Adelaide newspapers has been worldwide. Pungent comments from British, American and New Zealand journals have been featured by the papars here. Aside from the still undetermined legal position the current political focal point of the controversy is the position of the Minister for Information (Mr Calwell) on the Federal Parliamentary Committee recently appointed to investigate censorship.

Unless Mr Calwell retires from it, resignation in a body of the Opposition members of the committee is threatened, the former Information Minister (Senator Foil) announcing that such a mass resignation was under consideration. He said the committee’s deliberations would be useless if Mr Calwell remained a member. The alternative must be a Royal Commission. Mr Calwell stated earlier that he had no intention of resigning from the committee. Strong Attack Yesterday’s "Sunday Telegraph,” last week’s issue ol which was confiscated, carries a strongly-worded attack on Mr. Calwell. It says: “For last week’s tyrannical act - which could not have been bettered by Dr. Goebbels—Mr. Calwell as ministerial head ot the Censorship Department, must accept responsibility. He has spent the whole week trying to pass, the buck, but his technique is absurd and clumsy. When Mr. Calwell is cornered he tries to fight his way out with trickery and falsehood and every weapon of abuse he can lay his hands on. “He says last week-end’s happenings were a plot by the newspapers against the Curtin Government and the referendum. The Australian press is lighting a Calwell dictatorship, not the Labour Government. "Mr. Curtin’s enemy within the gate is Mr. Calwell himself, bitter, ambitious and unscrupulous. - This trouble-maker and intriguer fought Mr. Curl in savagely when the Prime Minister was working day and night to rally the Labour movement in support of tire Militia Bill. After tire election Mr. Calwell blustered his way into lire Cabinet unwanted by Mr. Curtin, unwanted by responsible members of the Federal Labour caucus. Mr. Calwell's conduct has besmirched the record of a great political party. Every day lie remains in power strengthens the hands of llrose who oppose the referendum.”