THE NEW GUARD

Otago Daily Times, Issue 21649, 20 May 1932, Page 7

THE NEW GUARD

CHARGE AGAINST LEADER ■f CROWN’S APPEAL DISMISSED (United Press Association.) (By Electric Telegraph—Copyright.) SYDNEY, May 19. (Received May 19, at 9 p.m.) The State Full Court dismissed the appeal by the Crown in the Colonel Campbell case, which arose out of a speech by the New Guard leader in which he scathingly criticised Mr Lang, who was not present on that occasion. The magistrate convicted Colonel Campbell of using insulting words. Certain policemen, in giving evidence, said that the words used by Colonel Campbell were insulting to them. Colonel Campbell, upon appeal, upset the conviction. The Crown then appealed to the Full Court, which gave-its decision to-day. The Chief Justice, in delivering the judgment of the court, said that the Statute was not meant to punish per sons for using words calculated to insult persons not present or uttered where there were no persons present closely connected with the person said to be insulted. The appeal, therefore, was dismissed.

The decision is regarded as most im portant in legal circles.

The prosecution arose out of a speech made on January 11 by Colonel Campbell, who referred principally to a petition which the New Guard intended to send to the King. Having made mention of the contingent of fire-fighters sent out by the New Guard, Colonel Campbell said a bush fire only destroyed material wealth. There was in New South Wales a scourge far greater than any bush fire —a scourge fhich had x-av-aged the State for nearly 18 months, unchecked. It had crippled, industry, increased unemployment a hundredfold, and spread ruin, disaster, and misery throughout the land. The New Guard would see that the bush fire of Langism was stamped out. There was in charge of the State a defaulting trustee. The citizens, in their blindness, had elected a Premier who had failed definitely and absolutely in all the basic pledges of personal integrity, individual security, and the sanctity of contract. Therefore, he had no right to continue in office. As a definite means of removing him the New Guard had prepared' the petition to the King. “We have pledged ourselves to rid' the State of a nasty tyrant,” said Colonel Campbell. “The safest way is to appeal to the head of the Empire to/ rid us of him. This is the first major petition presented by a dominion, colony, or dependency since before the War of American Independence. It is going to be an entire success. It is going to be the means of destroying Langism in New South Wales. When I say ‘ Langism ’ it conjures up in my mind everything which is loathsome in governipental control.” Colonel Campbell said that already 100,000 signatures had been subscribed. It was a petition for every decent, loyal citizen, of New South Wales. To fail to sign it branded 'the citizen as unpatriotic and pf no account. He asked everyone, including the “Lang-plan-ners,” to sign it. Then, if the buffoon at the head of affairs were returned after the dissolution, it would be proof that he had. the confidence of the people. “If it is not granted,” said Colonel Campbell, “I shall place before you for your adoption other means which will be quite lawful, quite constitutional, and very effective. In the petition I see the only lawful.and peaceful way of settling our difficulties. There are other ways, lawful, but possibly not so peaceful.” “The people of New South Wales will not permit Mr Lang to open the bridge,” Colonel Campbell continued. “I am determined that the man who has dragged our honour in the mire, who chooses men like Donald Grant and ‘Jock’ Garden, who belong to the Third International, to represent him, even though he masquerades as our Premier—l am determined that he will not open the bridge. As-the New Guard does not act as thecGommunists do, privily in the night, by sneaking action, we tell Mr Lang now that he will not open the bridge.”