The Ashburton Guardian. Magna est Veritas et Prævalebit. WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 19, 1888. TINWALD TOWN BOARD ELECTION.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume VII, Issue 1948, 19 September 1888, Page 2

The Ashburton Guardian. Magna est Veritas et Prævalebit. WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 19, 1888. TINWALD TOWN BOARD ELECTION.

The ratepayers of tho Tinwald Town District wiM doubtless have seen with somo surprise tho announcement published ovor the name of Mr B. J. Fooks, Returning Officer, that the proceedings taken according to law on tho 12th September last for the nomination of Commissioners for tho Town Board havo fallen through, and that a fresh nomination is to bo held on Monday noxt. Moro or Ices incorrect explanations of tho cause of all this havo appeared m our own columns and m thoso of our contemporaries, and it is well, therefore, to set ont tho actual facts as tho best way of preventing tho possibility of any further mistake being mado. Tho original notice, that is to say that for the first nomination, was duly advertised m proper form by tho Returning Officer on tho 4th of tho current month and on subsequent dates, and called upon the ratepayers to send m nominations for five persons to serve aB Commissioners on the Tinwald Town Board, 6aid nominations to bo m accordance with tho provisions of " The Town Districts Act, 1881," and its amendments, and " Tho Regulation of Local Elections Act, 1876," and to be delivered to tho Returning Officer at tho place named m. the notice (the Templar Hall) before 12 o'clock noon on Wednesday, September 12th. Seven or more nominations appear to have been accordingly sent m, one or moro of these boing rojocted by the Returning Officer as informal, and the remainder accepted ; that (or those) rejected boing m the following form, viz. : — To the' Returning Officer of tho Tinwald Town District. We, A JB. and O. D. being two duly qualified eleotors for tbe Tinwald Town Distnqt horaby nominate E. F. so a Candidate for the office of Commissioner at tho present eleotion. Dated thia (date filled io) day of Bepteraber^ XBBB. d, H. Elootor. ... J. ft. Elector. I hereby conßont to this nomination, E.F. Candidate. The Returning Officor, as wo uro informed, rejected tho paper or papers m question because the words "for the Tinwald Town District" were not insorted after the word " Commissioner," he boing apparently under the impression that it was neoessory to specify tho district by uame for which the proposed Commissioner was intended to serre. Jlad ho turned up the Regulation of Looal Selections Aot, however, he would have seeo tt)&t tfw is aot pecewtry, ft«

form given m the second schedulo being \ verbatim et literatim the satno as appeared m tho rejected pnp^r or papers, tho Legislature evidently deeming that tho addressing of tho nomination to the Returning Officer for a named district, and the words " at tho present olection," aro amply sufficient to show for what office the nomination is made. And undoubtedly this is so — indeed there can be no possibility of mistake, hence it is a matter for surprise that greater particularity should have been deemed necessary by tho Returning Officer. The rejected nomination or nominations being, as a matter of fact, m exact conformity with tho law, the election must necessarily havo been upset had action been takon to that end, aud therefore tho other candidates have wisely obviated for the district considerable expense and delay by withdrawing their names so I that proceedings can at once be taken de novo. But certainly tha Returning Officer should have rendered all this unnecessary by carefully looking up tho law on tho subject before taking the action he did. Not much harm, however, has boon done as things havo turned out, and our object m referring to the matter is simply to draw attention to certain provisions of tho law which may possibly be over-looked, m order that no further complications may arise. — Urst then, note should be taken of the fact that the nominators must bo persons whose names are on tho ratepayers roll, arid secondly, it must be remembered that whereas at the first election of the Town Board, every householder within the district was qualified to be elected a Commissioner, it is provided by section 16 of f< Tho Town Districts Act, 1881," that " at subsequent elections " no person oan be so elected who is not " rated for tho purposes of this Act at an annua rental of ten pounds at least." But we think we are right m assuming that "The Rating Act, 1882," is m forco within tho TCpwn District of Tinwald, and if so, then noto should be takon of the fact that section 14 of that Act provides that " Whenever by any Act or Ordinance heretofore passed, a reference is made to the rateable value of property. . , . euch reference shall bo bo read and construed that every five pounds of rateable value so referred to, shall be deemed to to be equal to' one hundred pounds of rateable value under this Act for tbe purpose of voting." This we think renders it necessary that a person to bo eligible for the office of Commissioner must bo possessed of real estate situated within tho district of the value of not less than £200 under the Property tax valuation, Tho scale of voting power* of electors will m accordance with that provision, be as follows :— A person possessed of property of a capital value of loss than £1000 will be entitled to one vote ; not less than £1000, but less than £2000, two votes ; not less than £2000, but less than £3000, three votes ; not loss than £3000, but less than £7000, four votes ; £7000 and upwards, five votes, which is the maximum number of votes excrciaeablo by any ono elector.