My Life

My Life - Oswald Mosleyhis effort to show the concerted action which is essential to the proof of riotousassembly, Mr. Flowers asked me if we had not come to Worthing intending to hangtogether, and I got out of the Hastings hand sufficiently to make appropriate reply.However, the proceedings had begun to dissolve after Hastings' cross-examination ofthe Chief Constable, who said he had been present at the events on the night of themeeting in plain clothes. Long before the normal end the jury notified the judge, Mr.Justice Branson, that they desired to hear no more, and he expressed his completeagreement in dismissing the case. This performance in two courts cost us £3,000, evenin those days. Process of law in England can be a very odd thing.A second action for libel, technically a slander, showed another strange aspect ofBritish law. Mr. Marchbanks, Secretary of the National Union of Railwaymen, read ata public meeting a document purporting to be signed by me, which instructed theblackshirts to arm. I knew well, of course, that no such document existed, and at onceissued a writ for slander. Pat Hastings again appeared for me and under crossexaminationMr. Marchbanks gradually admitted that he possessed no documentbearing my signature. Under further relentless cross-examination the fact emergedthat the document in question consisted of notes compiled by Mr. Marchbankshimself on information supplied to him by a man with a certain record who had beenexpelled from our movement. The information was whispered to Pat Hastings, whosaid: 'I have a passionate desire to see this gentleman in the witness-box'.These facts were proved up to the hilt, and we appeared to have an even stronger casethan in the Star libel action. The other side then put into the box several women whogave their own account of the fight at Manchester with rubber truncheons, which hadalready been mentioned in the Star action; after this I had given orders that noweapons should ever be carried by members, as I then explained. The emotional storyof these partisans— recounted without mention of the previous Red use of razors—clearly impressed the jury, which Pat Hastings had already observed contained somedetermined opponents. Usually so effective, on this occasion Hastings made a mistakein calling no rebutting evidence. He took the line that the case was in the bag and thata long-ago fight in Manchester had nothing in the world to do with the now clearlyproved fact that I had never signed a document giving orders to blackshirts to arm.However, emotion without answer was stronger than the facts, and we were awardeda farthing damages in a case which was even stronger than the action in which weobtained damages of £5,000.I too had made the mistake of taking the proceedings too jovially. The opposing K.C.was the able but choleric Mr. Pritt, well known as a left-wing M.P. He pressed meconcerning some points on which I had taken legal advice, notably—if I rememberrightly—the position of members of the forces under military law, if they were alsomembers of the movement. Finding himself frustrated in this line, he asked withheavy sarcasm whether I never moved without a K.C. at my elbow, and I replied that Isaw no reason why this advantage should be enjoyed by the Communist Party alone.This observation for some reason threw eminent counsel into a transport ofindignation. Not long afterwards I had to speak at a private dinner at which membersof various parties were present, and I complained that our movement was never reallydiscussed in the Press, nor elsewhere. Mr. Pritt rose and remarked that in his circleslittle else was ever discussed. I was surprised. A happy feature of these lawsuits wasrenewing acquaintance with the gay and brilliant Pat Hastings. In our days together in297 of 424