The Ashburton Guardian. Magna Est Veritas et Prevalebit. WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 24, 1883. Cumulative Voting.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume IV, Issue 850, 24 January 1883, Page 2

The Ashburton Guardian. Magna Est Veritas et Prevalebit. WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 24, 1883. Cumulative Voting.

In accordance with a promise given in our leading columns last evening, and because we think that the public should clearly comprehend how the Committee which is to have control of our local educational affairs during the ensuing year was chosen, we will proceed to analyse the voting on last Monday. The following table will serve to make the matter plain :

From this it will be seen that it is quite possible for a candidate to get together a number of people at a meeting who will give enough plumpers to make his election sure. Take, for example, the case of Mr St. Hill, who stood second on the list with 117 votes, but who really received the support of only twenty-four people, while that Mr Reddin was a fit and proper person to sit on the Committee was the opinion of but twenty of those who were present. Again, Mr G. W. Andrews, who is now In office, was voted for by the same number of householders as was Mr Bean, the very last on the list Wc do not mean to insinuate that the meeting was “ packed ” with the friends of any of the gentlemen named, but the power given to a comparatively few to carry an election should not be accorded, and this is alone sufficient to condemn the system of cumulative voting. It may be argued that even taking the number of persons who registered their votes, the Committee appointed would have been virtually the same. Granting this, we must bear in mind that while thirteen men considered that Mr St. Hill was the only one of those nominated who was worthy of a seat on the Committee, and nine others held the same opinion in regard to Mr Reddin, there were fourteen who thought that Mr Bean would make a useful member. Those who voted for the last mentioned candidate showed, in our opinion, more intelligence than those others who were satisfied with giving plumpers for their special friends. Let it not be imagined that we are finding fault with the present Committee. With the exception of two members, Messrs St. Hill and Orr, they are all new men, and for all we know they may develope special faculties for dealing with the work under their charge. Mr St. Hill has indeed expressed his intention of resigning, but it is to be hoped that he will reconsider his decision, as he has always shown himself to be in earnest, though he sometimes sins against good taste, as witness his remarks concerning the chairmanship at Monday night’s meet-

rig. But what we specially wish* to protest against is the cumlative votng, whichunder the most stringent upervision must be unsatisfactory. ?hat this supervision vas riot exercised, >r that even ordinary precautions were iot taken to prevent people votirig twice vas apparent to everyone who was-pre-;ent, and we can assert without fear of contradiction that not nearly a hundred bond fide householders attended the meeting, while the number of votingpapers received, as can be discovered by the table given above, was considerably more than that number. If cumulative voting is not a thing of the past by the time the next election takes place, it is to be hoped that some effort will be made in future to prevent a repetition of the fiasco of Monday last.

Sparrow ... 7 12 6 0 S 2 4 3 3 10 2 I 9 21 175 St. Hill ... 13 0 O 4 1 0 6 — no Orr 4 O 8 6 7 II — 109 Reddln 9 1 0 I 1 0 8 — 84 Mayo 4 0 O 5 3 5 11 — 78 Scaly 0 I 0 O 9 5 13 — 5 6 W. Roberts I O O 1 3 O 12 — 32 Andrews ... 3 O O O r S 9 — 43 J. Sealy .. O 1 O 0 t 4 8 — 25 Boyle 1 0 0 O I 3 9 — 25 Barrett O O O 3 I 4 2 — 25 Bean O O I O 1 3 14 — 23