ART O’BRIEN CASE.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 17038, 11 May 1923, Page 11

ART O’BRIEN CASE.

.HABEAS CORPUS WRIT GRANTED. By Telegraph—Press Association—Copyright Australian and N.Z. Cable Association. LONDON, May 10. The Appeal Court has granted the appeal oi Art O’Brien for a writ of habeas corpus. The Appeal Court held that the internment order was bad. Jn delivering judgment Mr Justice Ban-kes expressed the opinion that since the establishment of the Irish Free State, the Horne Secretary could nor properly make an order for the internment of a person in the Free State. The order deprived the Executive in England of the right to direct the release of an interned person. While an interned person was deprived of the particular form of control provided by the regulations, no order could be made for internment in the Free State, which would comply with the regulations.

It would seem from the Home Secretary's answers in Parliament that he was under the impression that ho bad not lost, control of the internees, but according to O’Brien’.*; affidavit, he was now under the control, of an official of the Free State. Therefore the question could not. be properly disposed of unless the rule nisi were made absolute. This would give the Home Secretary an opportunity of making his position clear. Mr Justice Bankes added that it would not be out of place to observe that the practice of legislating by Order in-Council was one which led to difficulties and dangers. of which the present case was an illustration. Mr Justice Scrutton and Mr Justice Atkin concurred.

The Attorney-General said that th© decision, which was a reversal of that given by the Divisional Court, raised questions of grave import. It was, therefore, the intention of those who were instructing him to oarrv the appeal to the House of Lords. Mr Justice Bences said that the Court anticipated that that would be done. An application would he made to the House of Lords to expedite the bearing.

FREE STATE AND PEACE.

BREAKDOWN REPORTED. LONDON . May 9. Mr W. TT. ComsvW© announced in the Dail l&rearm the breakdown of the negotiations between the Free State and de Valera. to fiis statement, de Valera requested Senators Tennyson and Douglas to meet him. to discuss peace, but President refused to allow h personal conference, and a dooumqpt embodying the Government's terms was submitted to oe Valera. The conditions laid down, were, (1) That all political issues bo decided by » majority of the -rotes of the elected representatives of the peqple. (2) That all lethal weapons in th© country be under the oontrol of the Executive. (3) That the surrender of arms must be a. preliminary for the release of prisoners, who must subscribe to the first two conditions. In reply, de Valera reiterated his declaration of April 27. and submitted , an amendment that a general election | should ho held not later than September 10, pending which the arms in the hands of Free State troops should be under strict supervision and control, while the Republican forces should have a suitable building in each province for the storage of their arms.

Mr Cosgvave said that the Government yesterday considered this document. and would send a reply that the question of the oath could not be considered. and the effective control of arms would be insisted upon. The Government was prepared to invite bishops to act through the local clergy as intermediaries for the eollection of arms. Mr Coagrave added that once their arms were handed in the prisoners who accepted th© terms would be released. I>e Valera had. replied, expressing disappointment at tho Government's reply, and saying: I have been met by a rigid insistence upon a, condition which is impracticable and unfair.” De Valera had been given until Wednesday to accept the terms, and had

PAPAL DELEGATE A SUSPECT.

LONDON. May 9. The Australian Press Asa6iation’s Lublin correspondent, dealing with Monsignor Luzin’s mission, states: ;; He came te Ireland ostensibly on an ecclesiastical mission, but his real object was to discover a way to peace. Tho Government, from tbe find, suspected Monsignor Luzio of working in tho Republican interests. Nevertheless, be vndoubtedly tried his best to secure a cessation of hostilities, to enable the Republicans to save their faces. He kept out of the limelight, but- th© Government was well informed of hi a work, and knew that he was trying to bring the strongest ecclesiastical influence to bear on Cabinet to force its hand to accept something less than tho complete surrender of the Republicans. It -was largely Monsignor Lusbi'o's representations which led de Valera to is*ue his peace terms. Monsignor Luxio almost succeeded, fn getting the Repv.blica.ns to surrender. From first to lest the Government has refused to have anything to do with him.” The correspondent adds: “The mission was a hard one. the important result proving that the ecclesiastical power in Ireland is nearly broken.*’