My Life

My Life - Oswald MosleyWhat earthly assistance to a political movement is an air rally?—Anything whichpromotes manly sport greatly helps a movement like ours. The Junior ImperialLeague has whist drives. We have air rallies, football matches, and boxing contests.There is a great deal of difference between a whist drive and an air rally? —Yes, allthe difference between conservatism and the fascist movement. (Laughter.)Supposing a communist government was in power with the consent of the King,would you still oppose it with guns?—You might ask what would happen if the Kingenacted the law of Herod and ordered every first-born in the land to be killed. Thequestion is so hypothetical as to be absurd.Can you answer it?—You cannot answer questions which are by their very natureabsurd.If the Communist Party were returned to power by the country and its leader wasinvited by the King to form a government, would you resist it?— By then thecommunists would be as mild as Mr. Ramsay MacDonald is now, compared to whathe used to be. (Laughter.)In no circumstances, continued Sir Oswald, would he use fascist machine-gunsagainst a constitutionally elected government in power on the invitation of the King.Asked whether fascists had not often been in conflict with the "Reds", Sir Oswaldsaid: "Yes, when they have attacked us. We have never interfered with the meetingsof our opponents, but when our meetings are violently attacked, we resist attack. Ifpeople try to shout down speakers at our meetings fascists are sent to throw them outwith their bare hands and nothing more."Do you not issue rubber truncheons to your forces?—Rubber truncheons are notissued to our forces, and the carrying of any weapon is absolutely forbidden infascism. Only once, in a very heavy fight at Manchester, rubber truncheons were used,after our men had been slashed with razors for weeks. Subsequently I forbade theseweapons being used.'The Times report then concluded as follows: 'The Lord Chief Justice, in summing-up,said that the defendants had deliberately put in the pleadings what every lawyer knewto be the very dangerous plea of justification. They had chosen to say that the wordscomplained of were true in substance and in fact, but when they came to deliverparticulars of justification they were unable to state what were the words used by SirOswald Mosley in his speech.'Did not the words complained of mean that, if Mr. Tom Mann has been thrown intoprison, how much more should the Government take steps to throw Sir OswaldMosley into prison? Was the article, as had been suggested, a plea for toleration? Orwas not the inactivity of the Government in connection with Sir Oswald Mosleycontrasted with its activity in the far less serious case of Tom Mann? Was it not ataunt to the authorities for not prosecuting Sir Oswald Mosley?'The jury would have to decide whether in his speech Sir Oswald Mosley used thewords which he was said to have used. Whatever the jury might think of his opinions,did he seem to them to be a public man of no little courage, no little candour, and nolittle ability? He had stated in evidence what he had said in his speech and hissecretary had produced her shorthand notes to support him. He had been crossexaminedfor a long time, but had anything come of it?295 of 424