Breach of Treaty: Mr. Thomas in House of Commons Dublin, May 3.
The _strugele between the Irish Free State and Great. Britain advanced another stage today when the Dail (Irish Parliament) passed the Bill abolishing' the Oath Aliegiance to. King George by 6 totes to 56.
Te Bill was subsequently signed by the Governor-General and. now SStomatieally becomes Taw.
posed ast pear by the Dal Senate'on March 009: uti was ejected by the Upper House.
Swing "to the "genera lection which intervened, it was held up for Gri days after which, in accordance swith the constitution, it now becomes law in spite of the opposition of the been Senate—Reuter.
London, May 4. minions, Se. W, Thomas, made Secretary of State for the
statement. in the House of Com thons regarding the action of the Trish Free Government in passing the removal. from the Constitution in the Dail yesterda He that the Government in the United Kingdom had made clear their views that any attempt to abolish the Parliamentary cath in the taken by the Irish Free State under the Treaty of 1921, This was confizmed by the form of the Irish Free [State legislation. The treaty was the fundamental basis of the position Jof the Irish Free State, and, in erder to achieve their object, the Trish Free State Government " had been compelled to include in their legislation clauses purporting not Jonly to abolish the requirement of Parliamentary oath, but also to repeal those provisions of the Constituents Act and the Constitution of the Irish Free State, which set out that the Treaty of' 1921 had the force of law. and an overriding thority in relation to the Constitu.
As regards levises on accom present legislation ip the United Kingdom considered that the passing of the Bill would not affect the duty of allegiance to the King, or amount to an act of secession. 'They wore advised that the allegiance of the members the Irish Free State Parliament did not depend upon the swearing of an loath, which, by treaty and constitation, they were required to take, and' therefore the failure to tal that oath was not in itself a xepudiation of allegiance. This did Met aiter the fact that, in view of [the Government in the United King-Jdom, the removal of the oath was breach of the—treaty.—Wireless through Reuter.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.