CASE OF MRS FREER

Press, Volume LXXIII, Issue 22109, 3 June 1937, Page 12

CASE OF MRS FREER

BAN REMOVED ENTRY INTO AUSTRALIA NOW PERMITTED DECISION OF FEDERAL CABINET [THE PRESS Special Service.] WELLINGTON, June 2. The ban placed on the entry of Mrs M. M. Freer to Australia some months ago has been lifted. Official advice to this effect was received this afternoon by her solicitor, Mr M. O. Barnett, of Wellington, from the Commonwealth Government. The decision was made at a meeting of the Federal Cabinet on Monday. Mrs Freer arrived in Australia last November from India, but was not permitted to land when she failed to pass a dictation test. Mrs Freer came on to Auckland, where the customs authorities, on the advice of the New Zealand Government, raised no objection to - her entry to the Dominion, it being held that the reasons which had influenced the Federal Government in its decision had no application in this country. She remained in Auckland for about three weeks and then went to Wellington where, in December, she secretly took a passage in the Awatea for Sydney, only to be refused admittance for the second time. She returned to Wellington where she has resided ever since, except.for a brief sojourn in Wanganui. Constant Negotiation Mrs Freer placed her- case in the hands of Mr Barnett. From he has been in constant negotiation with the authorities in Australia. Mrs Freer was lately engaged by him as an assistant in his office and took her place at the typewriter along with the stenographers on his staff. Mr Barnett received a cablegram this afternoon through the Australian Commissioner, conveying official advice that the ban had been raised. “It seems too good to be true,” said Mrs Freer. “I want Mr Barnett to have full credit for this triumph. He so persistent, and believed in the justice of my case. It is marvellous what he has done.” Asked what she intended to do in the immediate future Mrs Freer replied: “I have no plans at all. I am too excited to think. Of course, I am going to Australia. I intend to live with my aunt in Sydney for a while. After that I don’t know what I will do. In any event I won’t leave for Australia for two or three weeks." Mrs Freer said her attitude towards Lieutenant Dewar was just the same. She added that she bore no malice against the Minister for the Interior (Mr T. Pate’-son) or anyone. She wanted now to forgive and forget. It was a great relief and a weight off her mind that the implications against her character were disproved by the decision of the Commonwealth Cabinet. Since her arrival in New Zealand, Mrs Freer continued, she had been received with warm hospitality. If it had not been for the kindness of friends who had shown sympathy towards her she would not have been able to keep on with her fight to clear her name. “No Justification” Reviewing his association with Mrs Preer’s case, Mr Barnett said she was sent to him by friends after her return from Australia in December after her second unsuccessful attempt to gain entry. This episode was a plan adopted by a Sydney newspaper, which sent one of its representatives across the Tasman to escort her across. The mission failed. On taking up Mrs Freer’s case he communicated with her solicitors in Sydney to ascertain whether they contemplated taking further action. He received a reply that they did not propose to do so. His investigations led him to the conclusion that there was no justification for the ban, either constitutionally or through the allegations concerning her “My feeling was that a great injustice had been done to Mrs Freer, and I agreed to take up her the Australian Government,” said Mr Barnett. His first appeal, he continued, was made early in March. It was rejected by,the Federal Cabinet, which advised, after two months’ deliberations, that it was not prepared to review its decision. He decided to make a further personal appeal to Mr Paterson, who replied that the question of the removal of the ban would receive further consideration. Subsequently he sent a cablegram to the Minister and received confidential advice which led him to believe that there was still hope for a favourable decision. During the six months in which he had been handling the case he found Mrs Freer patient and courageous. He had seen nothing which would justify her being prohibited in any British country. She had made numerous friends in New Zealand, and from correspondence that had passed through his office, he believed she had hundreds of well-wishers in Australia. Mrs Freer had never been required to do work other than household duties, and her efforts to fend for herself while in New Zealand were praiseworthy. She was married at 19 in India, and was the mother of two children. Her husband left her in 1921, and she returned to England with her children, living there with her husband’s people until she returned to India to obtain a divorce in 1936. While awaiting the divorce she met Lieutenant Dewar, who was a passenger in the same vessel to Australia in October. The Acting-Prime Minister (Dr. Earle Page) announced: “Having regard to all the circumstances, including the fact that Mrs Freer has been resident in New Zealand for more than six months, the Cabinet has informed her solicitor, Mr Barnett, that no steps will be taken to present her landing in Australia.”

LIEUTENANT DEWAR TRANSFERRED

MOVED TO POST IN WESTERN AUSTRALIA SYDNEY, June 2. The “Sun” also publishes a report from Melbourne that Lieutenant Dewar, the officer concerned in the case, has received notice of his transfer to Western Australia. He will leave on Sunday. Lieutenant Dewar is reported to have said: “I naturally am pleased that Mrs Freer has been allowed to enter Australia, but I have no idea whether I shall see her.”