Alexander ‘Rud’ Mills (1885-1964) was one of the first people to restore Odinism to our people. It was Mills who established a functioning Odinist organisation, the Anglecyn Church of Odin in Melbourne, Australia in the 1930s and it was Mills who first named his cause Odinism. Mills was truly the Copernicus or Darwin of the spiritual path of our ancestors.

Mills’ views were the object of persecution by our Federal Government in the 1940s, which believed that Odinism was simply a front created by “rather clever propagandists, whose inclinations are pro-Axis”. In 1942, Mills was incarcerated without either charge or trial in a concentration camp at Loveday, South Australia. This was a result of the misconceptions of security agencies; false allegations made by an agent who would later be exposed as a communist spy; and the actions of people in another State totally unconnected to Mills.
On his return to freedom, Mills continued to promote Odinism, sowing the seeds of our ancestral faith in the fertile ground of a new generation of truth-seekers. Two of these younger Odinists deserve special praise.

Let us remember “Stubba”, an English warrior who served two terms in the French Foreign Legion. It was Stubba who reintroduced Odinism to the English in the early 1970s. Stubba is still alive, and his legacy is the world-famous Odinic Rite, which is now represented in several nations, including Vinland.

Let us also remember Else Christensen, known to all of us as The Folk Mother. Else died on 4 May 2005 aged well into her nineties. She was in contact with Mills until his death in 1964; and in her long-running magazine, The Odinist, she featured a regular column entitled, The Wisdom of Rud Mills, featuring quotes from their personal correspondence and Mills' books.

Stubba and Else were not disciples of some cult leader. They were heroic men and women whose eyes had been opened to the Odinist quest for truth by a truly brave Australian – ‘Rud’ Mills.

‘Rud’ Mills was born in Forth, on the central North coast of Tasmania, Australia in 1885. On 7 January 1901, at age sixteen, he wrote to the Minister for Education to apply to work as a teacher. Initially rejected because he was not yet 18, he eventually received confirmation on 21 August 1903 that his application would be accepted, and on 16 November 1903 he commenced at Invermay School as a 5th Class Assistant. Early the following year he was transferred to Queenstown School with an increase in salary.

Shortly after this, Mills moved to Western Australia to work for a municipal council digging post holes due to the low wages in Tasmania. He then moved to Victoria to complete his matriculation at the University at Melbourne and went on to attend the Melbourne Law School at the University of Melbourne, as a classmate of future Prime Minister Sir Robert Menzies.

Mills volunteered for service for the 1914-1918 war on a number of occasions but was rejected due to a leg injury, and was given a [1]Reject Soldiers Badge and certificate stating that he was medically unfit for service on his last attempt.

In 1917, after his graduation from the University of Melbourne he was admitted to practice as a barrister and solicitor of the Supreme Court of Victoria.

Mills travelled with Sidney Webb to the Soviet Union on an Intourist trip around 1922. Though, unlike Webb, Mills was disgusted by Soviet collectivism and its contempt for individuality. According to his wife[2], Mills wrote a book attacking the Russian system which remained unpublished at the time of his death. On his return to Australia, Mills gave an interview of his experiences in the USSR with The Argus[3] and conducted lectures[4] on this theme, to the dismay of local Communists.

After building up a considerable law practice in Melbourne, Mills decided to once again travel abroad in the years 1932-35 to study world politics. On this trip he visited England, Russia, Germany, North and West Africa and India. Though spending most of his time in the United Kingdom he travelled to Germany on a number of occasions and saw first hand the effects National Socialism had on that country. Mills was impressed by how the regime, in a short period of 6 to 8 months, had dramatically improved conditions for workers in Germany; providing food, shelter and clothing for the unemployed; and solving the terrible conditions he had witnessed on his earlier trips, which he had described as “heartrending”. He later stated in regard to Hitler that: “I felt that he had got on to something very good, I thought he had done a good job in that respect.”[5]

In the United Kingdom, he attended various political meetings including those of the National Liberals and Fascists. He met founder of the Imperial League of Fascists, Arnold Leese and maintained a correspondence with him for a number of years receiving their paper “The Fascist” until the outbreak of the Second World War. When Mills appeared before a Commission of Inquiry, some years later, he conceded that he believed Leese to be “at times misguided in his statements.”[6]

He also became involved with the Anglekin Body, which he described as being organised along Masonic lines, though it revered places and heroes where “some heroic British person has existed or fought for the Empire” … “say, Trafalgar or the Nile”[7] in place of those sacred to the Masons ie. Palestine and Isaac and Abraham.

During one of his visits to Germany he met a number of National Socialist leaders including Hitler and Dr Hempfstaengel. In discussing his thoughts on this some years later, Mills said that he believed that Hitler “appeared .. to be able, kindly and devoted to his country”, then added “but that doesn’t make me disloyal.”[8] He said that his meeting with Hitler was like one of a politician meeting a traveller. Whilst in Germany he visited a shop run by the Ludendorffs[9], and although he disagreed from a philosophical point of view, he corresponded with them on a number of occasions.

It is interesting to note that during a House of Representatives debate in 1942, Maurice Blackburn [Bourke, ALP] made the following poignant remark as part of his statement concerning the way the then German government was viewed at the time:

… Several years ago many Australians admired the system of government which prevails in Germany and Italy, and openly expressed their admiration. Many prominent members of this House have done so.[10]

In 1933, while in the United Kingdom, Mills released his first book, And Fear Shall be in the Way, under the pen name Tasman Forth. This discussed the effects of Christian ethics applied to politics. He later stated that he sent this to a number of countries around the world including, America, England, France, Germany, Italy, Norway and Sweden and received numerous positive responses. He said that he received a short response from Hitler and the President of the Library in Washington wrote at length suggesting that he might travel to America. John Macefield, the [then] present Poet Laureate, wrote approvingly and stated he intended to submit it to the Committee responsible for granting of the King’s medal for original thought and literature.

In 1935, Mills established the British Australian Racial Body, whose charter was the ‘preservation of the national character and British reputation for justice and honour and the creation of adequate military forces in this country and in the Empire.’ For the purposes of this group, he established The Angle Press as a business entity, and began production of a newspaper called The Angle. It is believed that five issues were produced.

It was also in this year that he published, Hael! Odin!, a book of poetry honouring the Nordic gods, again under the name Tasman Forth. Mills believed that copies of the book were obtained by those who opposed his views and made a formal complaint to the Victorian Attorney-General. The police were involved, whereupon the Crown Solicitor threatened to prosecute and imprison Mills for blasphemy, if he didn’t drop the issue.

It was about this time that Mills travelled to Western Australia and held a number of Odinist lectures.[11]

Mills’ broad interest in politics and free-thinking nature was probably encouraged by his friendship with W.D. Cookes, a Rationalist and former Socialist, who was a founding Director of the Rationalist Association of Australia. He approached Cookes for a subscription to The Angle[12] , because he knew he had an interest in religion and politics. Cookes would also later be investigated by authorities for his marginal support for the Australia-First movement (AFM).

In 1936, Mills moved to Sydney where he produced the newspaper, The National Socialist, subtitled 'A Paper devoted to the British Race and British Culture.' Only two issues were produced, the first in December 1936 carried the swastika on the cover clearly denoting “A.R. Mills” as its editor. The second issue, February-March 1937, was printed without the swastika. Mills later stated that he removed the symbol “because someone had suggested it was pro-German.”[13] In discussing this publication he said he was “sympathetic to the financial reforms which had been made in Germany and thought we [Australia] might well copy them.”[14]

Mills added some material that was heathen in character, though the paper was primarily focussed on political issues. A discussion of the origin of the names of the ‘Days of the Week’ included the following:

Sunday was the day especially set aside for things spiritual. Our fathers then worshipped the sensible light and the mental and spiritual light. Odin’s day – the longest day in the year, 21st of June, was the occasion of special religious devotions; for there was more light on that day than any other.

In the same issue there is a short piece entitled “Christmas Holidays” Old Yule-Tide, which says:

The Christmas season is older than Christianity. That period marked for our ancestors, the birth (21st December) of a new year for all Nature. As was said, it was the re-birth for all of the sensible manifestations of Odin. “Odin” for them meant that part of Od or God which man could understand consciously in some measure.

It was believed that manifestations of all Nature, their movements and changes, were resultants of a great power, a union of powers all functioning animated by and animating the spirit of Odin.

Sometime in 1936 while still in Sydney, Mills released The First Guide Book to the Anglecyn Church of Odin, which described ‘Fest’ days, ‘Services’ and ‘hymns’ (composed by Mills) among its contents. The book is described as having a sky blue cover, emblazoned with a golden sunwheel.

Both The Angle and The National Socialist promoted the “character” and “culture” of the British people. Though, because of his correspondence with Fascists abroad, as indicated above, these publications weighed heavily against Mills in the case security services were mounting against him. In 1942, during his Advisory Committee appeal to his internment, his solicitor asked if he received publications that expressed other views and he replied “Oh yes, I used to take Soviet Today and … the Jewish Chronicle”. His solicitor continued: “You were Catholic in your tastes in that respect?”, Mills answered “Yes”.

In 1938, Mills officially established the Odinist Society in Melbourne. Though photographic evidence received from a relative of the Mills family indicate that gatherings were taking place as early as 1936. The mention of an Odinist ceremony conducted near Melbourne, described as being held by “Nazis” appeared in the Sydney-based German language newspaper, Die Brück on 25 June 1939. It would seem to be describing one of the Mills-group gatherings though this cannot be for certain. This fact, was however, carefully noted by the Australian Security Service.

Mills then released, The Odinist Religion overcoming Jewish Christianity in 1939, which was an adaptation of lectures that he had given and pamphlets he published over the previous six or seven years. In August of this year he placed an advertisement for the Odinist Association in The Fascist.

Enter World War II, and Australia was faced with the possibility of foreign invasion. On 3 September 1939, Prime Minister, Sir Robert Menzies broadcast that Australia was now a participant in a war he had previously described as a "tragedy", a "wanton crime", and an "agony".

Menzies had done everything he could to avoid the war. Even as late as 18 August 1939 he had argued that the British and Germans 'have more in common than not, and the things we argue about are mere froth on the surface'.[15]

At the beginning of the war there were several attitudes concerning the position that Australia should take. One was that Australia’s long-term security was bound to the fate of the British Empire. This was the view of the Prime Minister, Sir Robert Menzies.

Others took a different view. The war in Europe didn’t affect Australia directly, and Australia’s armed forces might well be required to defend their homeland if Japan, or any other hostile force, were to threaten our shores.

The isolationist position was supported by the poet Ian Mudie, novelist Miles Franklin and Adela Pankhurst-Walsh of the famous suffragette family, and the Women’s Guild of Empire.

In 1940 there was a Federal Election in Australia, and Mills stood for the seat of Fawkner, Victoria under the obscure name of the Motorist Protection League. He stood opposed to future Prime Minister, Harold Holt (United Australia Party), to receive 2,152 votes (3.4%).

In October 1941, Percy Reginald “Inky” Stephensen launched the Australia-First Movement (AFM). The AFM took the isolationist position a step further and advocated the “right of the Australian Government to make war or peace at its own choice”[16], and urged that:

In the making of war, and in the eventual making of peace. Australia’s statesmen should permanently be guided, not by European or American interests and desires, but by the interests and desires of Australia first.[17]

Stephensen was no lightweight, and no disgruntled "outsider" figure. All his life he had advanced the careers of new, and particularly Australian, writers. It was probably inevitable that he would adopt the isolationist position with regard to the war in Europe.

The Solicitor-General, Sir George Knowles sent a minute to the Attorney-General containing an extract of a speech made by Stephensen on 17 November, which stated:

Australia is not at war with Japan, thank goodness. I hope she never will be, but I do want to make this clear, that if Australia were to be involved in a war with Japan and dragged into it by Britain and U.S.A., then it would be my duty to fight against Japan, but, so long as there is peace between the two countries, I am going to speak for peace.[18]

This stance was viewed with great suspicion by authorities who believed that the AFM were undermining the war effort and therefore supporting the enemy position.

It would be useful here to note the “association” Mills had with the AFM. Before the organisation was formed he wrote an article entitled Religion and Politics that was carried in the August 1940 issue of The Publicist, edited by Billy Miles.

Earlier in the same year, Miles convinced by Leslie Cahill whom Mills had known from Melbourne, publicised Mills’ candidature[19] for the Federal Election of 1940.

Mills joined the AFM in 1941 through his contact with Cahill, who was a speaker at the Yarra Bank, Melbourne. On 10 November, Cahill sent Mills his membership card commenting:

Your application form is the first we have received from Victoria so the honour of “Number” One in Victoria goes to you and there is no one more worthy of the honour than yourself.[20]

The reference, to “Number” One in Victoria, was misinterpreted by Security Services to wrongly believe that Mills was the leader of the AFM in Victoria; when Cahill actually meant that Mills was the first person to join.

Later on Mills wrote to Stephensen approvingly of some of the poetry he had written for The Publicist. Mills never attended a meeting of the group (which met in Sydney), and other than Cahill had never met another member.

Cahill also wrote to Mills and informed him that he had attempted to interest Stephensen in Odinism, though he had shown little interest,[21] at this time.

Authorities considered that this was a dangerous development, as they believed that Odinism was merely an invention of “rather clever propagandists, whose inclinations are pro-Axis”.[22] Security Service, Victoria, commented in a report dated 30 October 1941 that:

apparently the cult of ODIN is being used as a cloak for the more secret operations of this pro-Fascist, pro-Nazi, anti-Semitic organisation.[23]

Later, when Stephensen, who had been under government observation for some time, was taken into custody, Mills wrote a letter – intercepted by authorities – offering him legal advice. When Mills appeared before a Commission of Inquiry several years later, concerning the internment of members of the Australia-First Movement, he stated that he believed that this was one of the reasons he was arrested and detained.

At the outbreak of the war the Federal Government passed the National Security Act 1939 giving the authorities sweeping powers to rule by regulation. In effect, Australia (like Britain under Churchill) had moved close to being a dictatorship.

By 1942, there were 6,780 people held in concentration camps in Australia, including foreign nationals and Australian citizens believed to be political dissidents, held under the legislative regime established by the National Security Act.

Since the AFM's inception, Communists in the Sydney Domain and Yarra Bank in Melbourne, "speakers' corners", were calling for the internment of AFM supporters, who they claimed were Fascists. At a public rally on 18 November 1941, the State Labor Party, a New South Wales creation of the then-banned Communist Party, demanded that AFM supporters be interned.[24]

In the House of Representatives on 25 November 1941, Sydney Max Falstein [Watson, ALP], drew the Attorney-General's attention to the AFM, which he described as "anti-war, anti-Democratic and pro-Fascist".

A few months later, Abram Landa [Bondi, ALP], of the New South Wales Legislative Assembly, again urged for the suppression of the AFM, describing it as "pro-Fascist or anti-Semitic" on 25 February 1842.

In an AFM circular to Members of the New South Wales Parliament on the following day, Stephensen replied to Landa's claim that the AFM was "a Fascist body", and also that "one of the first planks of the Australia-First's programme is anti-Semitism", as follows:

Both these allegations are false, as will be seen from the enclosed leaflets dated 21st October, 1941, and 29th January, 1942, which are the only statements of policy issued and authorised by this Movement. Mr. Landa as a Jew appears to be more concerned with the welfare of the Jewish race than with the welfare of Australia first.

The overwhelming majority of Australians are not Jews, and we claim the right to oppose Jewish policies, as such, whenever such policies appear inimical to Australia's welfare. The active and organised opposition of Jews to the Australia-First Movement does not prove that this Movement is "anti-Semitic". It proves only that Jews, as Jews, are opposed to the political ideas of Australian National Independence, for which this Movement stands.[25]

In an AFM circular to Members of the Commonwealth Parliament dated 28 February 1942,[26] Stephensen responded to an article of the same day in the Sydney Daily Telegraph, titled "Suppression of Movement Sought" which stated:

More than 120 soldiers and airmen have petitioned the Army Minister (Mr. Forde) to suppress the Australia-First Movement. Signatures on the petition include those of men of the A.I.F., A.M.F., V.D.C., and R.A.A.F.

Stephensen response was clear:

This follows upon requests to similar effect previously made in Parliament by Messrs. Max Falstein, M.H.R., and Abraham Landa, M.L.A., on behalf of Jewish minority interests. I respectfully ask for the protection of Parliament against any arbitrary "suppression" of the Australia-First Movement in response to "ex-parte" statements made by its political opponents.

The Australia-First Movement is a properly-constituted political organisation, loyal to the King and Constitution of Australia. Our Members and Officers are all Australians, and we support the Government in all measures taken for the protection of Australia.

…

We claim the traditional political rights of lawful Public Assembly and Public Discussion, in order to oppose, by legitimate methods, the influence of "international" organisations which we believe are operating in a manner detrimental to Australia's interests. We claim also the right to criticise the Government's policy in certain respects, with a view not of hindering but of intensifying Australian Defence.

If, as stated in the "Daily Telegraph", a "petition" has been signed by 120 members of the Armed Forces, it is evident that our political opponents have acted in a manner subversive of military discipline by stirring-up political controversy among men serving in the A.I.F., A.M.F., V.D.C., and R.A.A.F., for a purely sectional and civilian political purpose. We have certainly not attempted, and would not attempt, to approach men serving in the Armed Forces to sign a "counter-petition" in our favour, though many would do so if asked.

On these facts there would appear to be grounds for an investigation into the bona fides of the person or persons who organised such a "petition" among the Armed Forces.

The Publicist was distributed by newsagents nationwide and the AFM therefore had supporters throughout the country.

In Western Australia, four sympathisers, though not members of the AFM were arrested on 9 March 1942 for what was described as a “plot” to assist the Japanese and for treason against Australia.

The Western Australians were not affiliated with the Stephensen group based in Sydney. Laurence Bullock, the leader of this group was in contact with one Madeline O’Loughlin, an Austrian who had married an Australian living in Perth and a supporter of the Sydney group. Bullock had suggested that she write to AFM to advise them that he intended to start a political party in Western Australia with AFM policies.

O’Loughlin wrote to the Sydney group putting forth Bullock’s suggestion. Billy Miles, then editor of The Publicist, replied that he was not in favour of this claiming that he did not want Bullock as his agent in Western Australia. This was the extent of the contact between the two groups.

What was to take place as a consequence of this “plot” in Western Australia was a nationwide round-up and arrest of all known AFM organisers and even rank and file supporters under the premise that they were a threat to the nation.

Authorities later stated that they did not believe that the Western Australian and New South Wales groups were affiliated. On 2 September, the Attorney-General made the following declaration in Parliament:

Four persons in Western Australia were arrested, and the evidence against them seemed to be cogent. Subsequently, they were charged with conspiracy to assist the Japanese in the event of an invasion of Australia. I am not saying that they were members of the Australia First organization which was formed in New South Wales.

And again on 10 September, he repeated that there was no connection between the two groups:

It is reasonably clear that there was no guilty association between the Western Australian conspirators and the sixteen New South Wales internees.[27]

During the debate of 2 September, Mr Archie Cameron [Barker, CP] queried why the New South Wales internees would not be tried in open court:

In Western Australia, four persons were publicly tried, and nothing came out at the trial which was likely to prejudice the security of the Commonwealth. I cannot believe that there was any sound reason against the holding of similar trials in the criminal courts of New South Wales, if only the Commonwealth Attorney-General had felt so disposed.[28]

Although there was no evidence of “guilty association” between the two groups, supporters of the AFM in New South Wales were arrested and interned regardlessly.

It has also been revealed, that authorities used an agent provocateur, “Carl Hardt”, whose real name was Frederick James Thomas, to entice the WA group to plan seditious activities.[29] Thomas is believed to have acted in a similar capacity on a previous assignment, where he was accused of planting evidence on known communists, leading to arrests.

The issue of the use of an agent provocateur was noted in Parliament by Arthur Caldwell [Melbourne, ALP] in the following comments:

it would appear that the charges were levelled in a moment of hysteria and were based upon certain information which was disclosed by an agent provocateur in Western Australia who had been associated in that State with some people who claimed connexion with the Australia First Movement.

Mr Archie Cameron [Barker, CP] interjected:

And who had been associated with the Communist party before that.

Mr Caldwell continued:

I have no time for the Communist philosophy, but I believe that that person joined the Communist party not because he believed in its philosophy, but in order to create trouble. At any rate, he was a rather disreputable individual socially, and it was upon his statements that the people in Western Australia were eventually arrested.[30]

On 10 March 1942, the Security Service commenced mass arrests of the AFM, with the executive and influential members arrested. In total sixteen[31] members were arrested and subsequently interned in concentration camps around Australia.

One such member was Leslie Cahill, who had previously served on the executive of the AFM, though had resigned from the position and enlisted on 20 January 1942 to serve as an army private. He was arrested on 11 March and taken to Loveday camp in South Australia, where he was held for nearly two years, until 6 February 1944.

Mills was also visited on 10 March. Major Ted Hattam of Military Intelligence and Sub-Inspector Birch of the Victorian CIB Special Branch searched Mills’ Canterbury flat and interviewed him in the belief that Mills’ political involvement in the early 1930s, support for the AFM and his faith in Gods (whom they deemed were the invention of “rather clever propagandists”), made him a threat to national security. They searched his premises, finding copies of The Publicist and his books on Odinism. They also confiscated Odinist cards decorated with the swastika.

In Hattam’s report of 13 March he recommended that Mills be interned, stating: “from this man’s history and his association with known Nazis. I definitely regard him as a danger.” On 29 March the recommendation for Mills’ internment was approved and on 7 May Mills was arrested, and taken under armed guard to a detention camp in Broadmeadows. From there he was sent to Loveday, South Australia.

Although Mills was interned at the time of the AFM arrests, he was not considered part of the group. Authorities were more interested in his contact with Fascists abroad and Odinism, which had repeatedly been highlighted in the reports concerning Mills.

Stephensen, the leader of the AFM, was arrested on 20 March and sent to Tatura camp in Victoria and later transferred to Loveday. His internment would last for three years, five months and one week. Adela Pankhurst-Walsh, who had previously served on the executive of the AFM though had resigned, was also arrested on 20 March 1942.

These camps were inhospitable to say the least; barbed-wire, machine gun towers in remote locations where prisoners were at times starved of rations and brutalised.

For a period of over two weeks the internment of AFM supporters was kept secret by the Government. Finally, on 26 March 1942, in response to a question from Mr David Watkins [Newcastle, ALP], about the reported internment of members of the Australia-First Movement, the Minister for the Army, Mr Forde [Capricornia] made the following statement in House of Representatives:

I wish to state that twenty persons—nineteen men and one woman—who were believed to have been associated with the so-called “Australia First” movement have been arrested and interned. Documents and papers which have been seized purport to show that certain people in Australia intended to make contact with the Japanese army at the moment of an invasion of Australia. The documents set out elaborate plans for sabotage at vulnerable points in this country, and describe methods calculated to make resistance to the Japanese impossible. Plans for assassination of prominent people are set out. One document purports to be a proclamation with the heading “Australia First Government” and “welcomes to this country as friends and liberators the Japanese leaders and army”. These documents indicate a fifth column activity of the worst kind by a very small band of people. The military authorities have been investigating the activities of the so-called “Australia First” movement for a considerable time, and the arrests took place as a result of these inquiries. In view of the foregoing, I wish to warn people that, before associating themselves with any movement, they should assure themselves that it is bona fide and not an organization which, under a pleasing name, is designed as a cloak for subversive activities. We will stand no Quislings, whether they come from the highest or the lowest.[32]

On the morning of the following day, Mr A.P. Fadden, the Leader of the Opposition moved an adjournment motion in order to discuss Minister Forde’s statement. As part of this debate, Mr Maurice Blackburn [Bourke, ALP] made the following statements, urging for legal proceedings to be held in public:

if they are alleged to be guilty of treasonable practices, their conduct should be investigated by a jury sitting under the direction and guidance of a judge.

…

Either they should be liberated speedily or speedily prosecuted, and no man should be interned or held in prison merely on suspicion, because he has been the associate of some of these persons who have been accused of treasonable practices.

… until they have been tried this House and the country generally should suspend its judgement, and nothing should be said to render their trial unfair.[33]

Mr Frank Brennan [Batman, ALP], who was a member of the Australian Civil Liberties Union, an organisation that had been critical of the draconian measures legislated under the National Security Act, revealed Mills’ case:

I have in mind the case of a person in the city of Melbourne who is well known to me. He is, indeed a fellow practitioner. He has been seized and placed in an internment camp in another State, apparently on suspicion–there has certainly been no trial–that he has been guilty of some subversive activity. I take leave to have my own suspicions about the case, namely, that the action of the authorities is absurd and preposterous. I admit that my view is based on quite insufficient evidence, but I do know the attitude of the gentleman in question towards the charges made against him, and I am sufficiently well acquainted with him to know in a general way what his outlook on international affairs is. I know, also, that he was an accredited candidate at the recent federal elections in a constituency not far removed from my own, and I venture to suspect that he is a decent British subject and an honourable citizen.[34]

The National Security Act established an appeals system open to internees, whereby objections to internment, would be heard by an Advisory Committee or a Special Committee. These appeals were held in secret, and did not apply the normal rules of adjudication. Further, there was no mechanism for appellants to clear their names publicly, as the names of some of the AFM internees were mentioned in Parliament and subsequently in the media. Internees also pointed to the statement made by the Minister for the Army, as being prejudicial to a fair trial particularly his comments that “documents indicate a fifth column activity of the worst kind” and “military authorities have been investigating the activities of the so-called “Australia First” movement for a considerable time”.

Initially, 12 of the sixteen (NSW) internees appealed under the regime established by the National Security Act. But after the methods employed by the appeals system were realised, 7 of these were withdrawn 'because they did not want to be tried by a secret tribunal.'

The internees stated that they did not recognize the jurisdiction of the Advisory Committee and pointed to a statement made by the Prime Minister, Mr Curtin that appeared to indicate that they would be given an open trial.

The whole processes of law will be invoked; the civil authority will be directed to formulate charges on the evidence that is available. I agree … that there ought to be no prejudicing of the fair trial of these people, and that they ought to be given every opportunity to establish their innocence, if they are innocent.[35]

In Parliament, Mr Bernard Corser [Wide Bay, CP] noted that he had received correspondence from an internee protesting to being denied an open trial:

I am not aware which of the internees in New South Wales has been released but I know something of the president of the movement in that State. If he is still interned I say in the name of British justice that something should be done to assist him to a fair and open trial. I knew him long before he went away as a Rhodes scholar; I know what his activities were on the other side, and since his return to Australia no one can say that he has not lived a successful and honourable life in the community.

He claims that the public statements made in this chamber and published to the world really made him a criminal before he had an opportunity to say anything at all. He claims that he was one of seven among the sixteen internees of the movement who collectively signed a letter addressed to the Minister for the Army (Mr. Forde) in the following terms: -

We the undersigned internees are refraining from appearing before the Advisory Committee established under regulation 26(2) of the National Security Act because it is a secret tribunal.

Then he goes on–

Implying thereby that I, as one of the aforesaid seven internees who signed the said letter, desire to be publicly exonerated and exculpated from all suspicion of indictable offence or any offence, and I say further that the Minister for the Army exceeded the powers conferred upon him by the National Security Act in making public statements of his reasons for believing himself to be satisfied to have me interned and to keep me interned without affording me any opportunity of publicly denying or rebutting the said reasons, which were in any case fallacious and absurd, and for the reasons set out herein I say that I am wrongfully and illegally detained, interned and imprisoned.[36]

Mr John Rosevear [Dalley, ALP], also criticized the methods of appeal employed:

The Minister says that these persons have a tribunal open to them, I suppose that he knows that the methods adopted before that tribunal would not be tolerated in any ordinary court of law. Indeed, it was because some of the internees realized the futility of an appeal from Caesar to Caesar that they withdrew their appeals.[37]

Mills chose to appear before the Advisory Committee, and his objection was first brought on in South Australia on 22 July 1942. He informed the Advisory Committee there that he had applied some weeks earlier to have his objection heard in Victoria. The South Australian Advisory Committee adjourned the matter so his application could be determined. With no advice being received, the Advisory Committee had Mills brought before them again on 10 September only to discover that Mills had received no reply. So the hearing was again adjourned and the Advisory Committee communicated with the Security Service to ascertain what was being done about his application for change of venue.

Mills was not informed until 7 October that his objection would be held in Melbourne, and although other internee objections were heard on the week commencing 17 October, Mills’ was not, and did not appear until 22 November.
The Advisory Committee made the following comments in relation to the delays in relation to Mills’ objection:

We have, in previous recommendations, protested against what appeared to us to be unconscionable delay in bringing objections for hearing and against the manifest injustice caused thereby to the objector.

The present case appears to be a flagrant instance of unjustifiable and unreasonable delay, accentuated by the fact that the objector is a natural-born British subject of British extraction and professional standing.

Mr Menzies, Leader of the Opposition, mentioned Mills’ case in Parliament in March 1944, as follows:

One of the men is a solicitor. I happen to know him quite well, because he went through the university at the same time as I did. He had been practising as a solicitor in Melbourne for a long time. His association, so I am informed, with the Australia First Movement amounted to this: some man who had secured appointment with the movement wrote to him and asked him to subscribe, and he forwarded 10s. 6d. as a subscription.

Then he was haled out of his home, imprisoned and put in an internment camp. He was there for month after month. … Nothing worse could happen. All that time he was without charge and without trial. Subsequently, facilities were made available, and his case went before a tribunal. It recommended his unconditional release, and he was released-after being for months in an internment camp in his own country, of which he is a native of the second or third generation.

…

I know this man, and I know something of the disaster which this has brought upon him.

Here is a man who for twenty-odd years was building up a practice as a professional man. He was taken out of his home, just as anybody might be. He was incarcerated in circumstances of immense notoriety. When he came out, what happened? His friends were gone, his practice gone, his reputation was gone. Everything that was of importance to him had gone.[38]

Mr Eric Harrison [Wentworth, UAP], during the same debate also highlighted the futility of internees’ appeals to an Advisory Committee:

Their release confers on them no advantage other than that of their liberty, because they have been robbed of their good name, ostracized by their friends, and held up to public criticism, disrespect and contumely. Men who have been wrongly arrested and interned can regain a measure of their former status only if a full statement be made clearing their names.[39]

In June 1944, the Attorney-General set up a Commission to investigate the detention without trial of members of the Australia-First Movement, to be headed by Justice Clyne. Mills was grilled for nearly three days[40] in the witness stand about his political involvement with Fascists in the early 1930s, his own publications of this genre, his association with the AFM and Odinism. Mills gave clear explanations of his actions, and the Commission did acknowledge that a number of misapprehensions had been made in reports about Mills by the Security Service. The Commission did, however, find that there were sufficient reasons for Mills’ detention, and that he was therefore not entitled to compensation as some AFM internees were.

In his report, the Commissioner did acknowledge that:

… after the outbreak of war he had not disclosed in his conduct any hostility to the allied cause.[41]

During the Inquiry, Mills was also able to respond to the misconceptions concerning his religious beliefs that were being circulated. The Commissioner writes:

Mills did not approve of the Christian religion and thought its influence would break up the British Empire, but in adopting “the Odinist religion” he did not do so because it had some sway in Nazi Germany.[42]

In the Parliamentary debate on the question of whether the Clyne report be printed, Mr Joseph Abbott [New England, CP] made the following remarks regarding one of the key officers responsible for the incarceration of the New South Wales internees.

I desire to place on record some of the types of evidence on which these men were interned for many months. The gentleman who seems to have been principally responsible for their incarceration was a Captain F. B. Blood, officer in charge of investigations of the Australia First Movement and the Publicist. He was the expert in this matter, and both Colonel Powell and Captain Newman stated in their evidence that their actions were based upon the reliance which they placed on him. He was the key man, who was responsible for the reports and the statement which landed these men in an internment camp. Let us examine some of the evidence which the Captain gave under cross-examination by Mr. Cassidy, K.C.

Mr Cassidy asked whether every article in the Publicist had been censored. Blood replied, “No, probably none at all”.

Mr. Cassidy then asked “Do you say that seriously?” and Blood answered, “Quite seriously. Because of the policy of the Government, all publications were under voluntary censorship”.

Yet as a matter of fact, every copy of the Publicist had been censored since 1940.[43]

In response to an objection to another of Blood’s statements by the Attorney-General, Mr Abbott responded:

The Attorney-General is a great constitutional lawyer, a great student, and a great Roman lawyer. There is an expression in Roman law, Falsum in uno, falsum in omne. “Sniffer” Blood, if false in one thing, is false in everything, and none of his evidence which was given against the members of the Australia First Movement is worth a damn. He is a tainted witness.

During the inquiry Mr. Cassidy, K.C., read to this gentleman an article on Hitler. … He asked when it was written, and Mr. Cassidy replied, “About 1937”. Blood, who is a lofty gentleman, said –

It is hardly a Churchillian statement. I disagree with it.

Mr. Cassidy then revealed that the article had been written by Churchill, and included in his book Great Contemporaries. That shows what Blood’s judgement was worth. I quote another extract from the evidence of this delightful gentleman. A passage was taken from a speech by the late John Curtin, in this House on the 27th September, 1938, regarding the Munich negotiations. Blood remarked –

That involves Australia in Secession from the British Commonwealth of Nations.

The following words were contained in Mr. Curtin’s speech :-

Our first duty is to Australia

That was one of the tenants of the Australia First Movement. Blood said –

I strongly disagree with that.

No one suggested that Mr. Curtin should have been interned. The extracts which I have read show exactly what Blood’s evidence was worth.

… I suggest that he be reported to the Law Institute of New South Wales, where I understand he practices as a solicitor, and that it be suggested that he be struck off the roll of legal practitioners in that State.[44]

It is important to note here that another police officer, Alfred Thompson Hughes, who gave evidence to the Clyne Commission, and who had been preparing reports on the AFM and Mills; had allegedly been a Communist since 1932. Around the time of the Commission he was recruited by Walter Seddon Clayton to act as a Soviet spy with the code name “Ben”.[45] Hughes was responsible for the repeated claim that Mills had been on the executive of the Nazi party of Australia, and was still on the AFM executive.

Mr Paul Hasluck, writing the history of Australia during the Second World War for the Australian War Memorial squarely sums up the case of the Australia-First Movement:

The Australia First Movement certainly did not represent any organised subversion or any organised action prejudicial to the Australian war effort.

…

The detention of the 21 persons concerned was undoubtedly the grossest infringement of individual liberty made during the war and the tardiness in rectifying it was a matter of shame to the democratic institution and to the authorities concerned.[46]

After the war, the Odinist Society either dissolved or went very deeply underground. Cahill vanished from public life so completely that no photo of him is known to survive. Mills wrote to Stephensen stating that he was working on a book about internments worldwide, but this never surfaced.

Mills remained in contact with Stephensen, and as late as 1954, he wrote to Stephensen and sent him a pamphlet, The Odinist Movement, No. 3: Coming – The New Religion. In his reply to Mills, Stephensen concluded that he believed Odinism to be “perfectly normal and natural”.

In 1957, Mills released his final book, The Call of our Ancient Nordic Religion, after a gap of fifteen years. This work is probably what Mills is best remembered for and most widely available. In Australia, this can still be found in most State Libraries and the National Library of Australia.

Mills’ life was certainly one of highs and lows. His involvement with various political causes reveals, more than anything, a free-thinking man who was always willing to explore different philosophies and points of view.

For this, more than anything else, he was wrongly labelled dangerous, and detained and persecuted.

It doesn’t seem plausible, as security agencies alleged, that Mills’ interest in the ancient Nordic faith of Odinism, was merely a means to support a Fascist agenda by stealth. His actions, to continue to spread the Odinic faith after his internment, support this proposition.

That is not to say that there weren’t those involved in the Nazi regime or Fascist groups that had an interest in Heathenism, however, that does not mean that this was the reason Mills established Odinism in Australia.

It can equally be said that there were strong Christian tendencies among such groups. Though, as Christianity was not something “new” or “unknown”, it didn’t capture the imagination of security agents in quite the same way. Especially those trying to compile a case against Mills.

It is a fact that much of the National Socialist leadership, including Hitler and Himmler, were in fact, devout Christians. The so-called heathenism, that has been suggested to have existed in the régime, would be better described as medieval Christian mysticism. These mythologies, such as those surrounding the Spear of Longinus or The Holy Grail are features of Arthurian legend,[47] heavily steeped in Christian morality.

It is also a fact that in 1933, Hitler outlawed one of the main Heathen groups Tannenbergbund, headed by General Ludendorff. Many heathens were interned in concentrations camps in Germany for nearly identical reasons to those in Australia – because their government was concerned with their political views and considered that they posed a threat to the State.

Finally, it can probably be asserted that Mills’ exploration of various doctrines: Socialism, Rationalism, Fascism, and his devotion to Odinism, left him anti-Christian and perhaps a little anti-Semitic. But it should be said that he was primarily driven by his devotion to his people and the rediscovery of their ancient faith, which he called Odinism. A religion he believed encapsulated the soul, spirit and culture of the North European.

[1]	Evelyn Mills wrote the following details in her copy of Muirden’s Puzzled Patriots, “1st World War 1914-1918, Reject Soldiers Badge, No. 65039, Alexander Rud Mills”.
[2]	Muirden, p. 75.
[3]	The Argus, 20 July 1932.
[4]	Muirden, p. 75.
[5]	Advisory Committee transcript, p. 11.
[6]	Report of Commissioner [Justice Clyne], p. 15.
[7]	Advisory Committee transcript, p. 29.
[8]	Muirden, p. 186. Endnotes, “13 Judgement”, note 2.
[9]	See “Erich Friedrich Wilhelm Ludendorff”, under Appendix B.
[10]}	Commonwealth Parliamentary Debates, Vol. 170, 27-3-42, p. 518.
[11]	Winter, p. 41.
[12]	Muirden, p. 75.
[13]	Report of Commissioner [Justice Clyne], p. 15.
[14]	Report of Commissioner [Justice Clyne], p. 15.
[15]	Daily News, Sydney, 18 August 1939.
[16]	Extract from the ten-point manifesto adopted at a meeting on 20 October 1941. Hasluck, p. 722.
[17]	Australia-First Movement circular, 29 January 1942.
[18]	Hasluck, p. 723.
[19]	January 1940.
[20]	Correspondence from Leslie Cahill to Rud Mills, 10-11-41, carried as annexure 12A to the request for warrant for Mills detention of 13-3-42.
[21]	Correspondence from Leslie Cahill to Rud Mills dated 21-10-41.
[22]	Captain Blood, Military intelligence report, 13 March 1941. An appendix to this report by Major Tyrell concerned the connection between Odinism and the Australia-First Movement.
[23]	Winter, p. 110. See also Security Service report no. 25 for the week ending 30 October 1941.
[24]	Muirden, p. 54.
[25]	Australia-First Movement circular, 26 February 1942.
{26}	Australia-First Movement circular, 28 February 1942.
[27]	Commonwealth Parliamentary Debates, Vol. 172, 2-9-42, p. 52.
[28]	Commonwealth Parliamentary Debates, Vol. 172, 10-9-42, p. 155.
[29]	Muirden, pp. 77-92.
[30]	Commonwealth Parliamentary Debates, Vol. 172, 2-9-42, p. 43.
[31]	The list of Australia-First Movement internees appear as Appendix D.
[32]	Commonwealth Parliamentary Debates, Vol. 170, 26-3-42, p. 462.
[33]	Commonwealth Parliamentary Debates, Vol. 170, 27-3-42, pp. 517-518.
[34]	Commonwealth Parliamentary Debates, Vol. 172, 2-9-42, p. 46.
[35]	Commonwealth Parliamentary Debates, Vol. 170, 27-3-42, p. 521.
[36]	Commonwealth Parliamentary Debates, Vol. 172, 2-9-42, pp. 53-54.
[37]	Commonwealth Parliamentary Debates, Vol. 172, 2-9-42, pp. 60.
[38]	Commonwealth Parliamentary Debates, Vol. 178, 30 & 31-3-44, p. 2455.
[39]	Commonwealth Parliamentary Debates, Vol. 178, 30 & 31-3-44, p. 2463-64.
[40]	Muirden, p. 144.
[41]	Report of Commissioner [Justice Clyne], p. 15.
[42]	Report of Commissioner [Justice Clyne], p. 15.
[43]	Commonwealth Parliamentary Debates, Vol. 186, 14-3-46, p. 343.
[44]	Commonwealth Parliamentary Debates, Vol. 186, 14-3-46, p. 344-45.
[45]	Winter, p. 161.
[46]	Hasluck, pp. 741-742. As a point of interest The Rt. Hon. Sir Paul Hasluck KG, GCMG, GCVO became Australia’s 17th Governor-in-General on 30 April 1969.
[47]	That is not to say that there is not a Heathen element submerged in Arthurian mythology, but it is fair to note that these stories were heavily Christianized during the “golden age” of Christianity in the Middle Ages. It was at this time when many Heathen Gods were demoted to Christian saints or devils.