ADMISSIONS BY BOTH SIDES OF IRREGULAR VOTING

Chronicle (Levin), 15 April 1947, Page 8

ADMISSIONS BY BOTH SIDES OF IRREGULAR VOTING

Press ' Assvc'iation

By Telegraph—

HAMILTON, April 14. Brought on the grounds of alleged irregularities in voting at the General Election on November 27, the Elecioral Court at Hamilton was today occupied with the hearing of-the petition by Mr. Hallyburton Johnston (National) that the result of the Raglan election be reversed and that he be declared the elected member, instead of Mr. Allan Cheyne Baxter (Labour). Mr. Baxter was elected by 39 votes, a majority later reduced by magisterial recount to 33.

The case is being heard before the Chief Justiee, Sir Humphrey Q'Leary, and Mr. Justiee Blair. The petitioner is represented by Mr. W. J. Sim, K.C., of Wellington, Mr. R. E. Tripe, of Wellington, and Mr. A. L.. Tompkins, of Hamilton. (Jounsel for the respondent" are Messrs T. P. Cleary and li. Iiardie Boys, both of Wellington. There was a large attendan.ee in the pubiic portion of the Courtroonf. Mr. fsim, opening the ease for the petitioner, said the Court would be asked to raview some of the 167 votes whieh the petitioner asked shonkl be serutinised, his elaim being that, in t'aet, a majority of valiu votes had been east for him. Mr. Sim, dealing with the vot-ss challenged on the ground of the residential qualification of the voters, said that, as a result of exhaustive inciuiries hy both sides, it was admitted hy the respondent that 18 of 21 voters, whorn the petitioner claimed lived outside the Raglan houndaries, were, in fact, living outside the houndaries at' the date of the " election. This had arisen from boundary changes, and, whiie no aspersio'n was cast on the voters concerned, it was admitted hy the respondent that their votes must he disallowed. No formal evidence would therefore he tendered in these 18 cases, Mr. Sim said. The petitioner made similar admissions in respect of nine — and perhaps another two — votefs on the list presented to the Court hy Mr. Baxter. Of votes Vihich he in turn was challenging, it v/as clearly comirmed that, in the 18 and the nine cases • ref erred to, it was 1 agreed hy both sides that the voters were not qualified because they lived — even if oniy by a matter of yards — outside the Raglan houndaries. Petitioner 's list of votes to whieh he objected on residential grounds, ineouid, in addition to the 2,1 claimed to reside outside ihe houndaries, 26 allegedlv resident for Jess than three months in Raglan before the election, fonr allegedlv resident for less than three month.i at the date of rogistration and on the ciosiug of rolls, 24 who allegedlv moved and had gained quali-Ih-ation in another electorate, iive wliose true place of residenee was outsiile the electorate, and oue who had n it been resident for one year in New Zealand. A further 19 voters were challenged as being Maoris, one as being an infant and one as not being a British. subject. One vote declared informal at the. Magisterial recount was claimed to be a valid vote for petitioner while live votes allowed by the Magisterial recount as valid for respondent were challenged as informal. Dealing with the absentee votes, petitioner challenged 15_on the ground that the elector was married and that there was no signature in the married . name on the registration card to compare with the voter's declaration, six on the ground that the signature on the declaration did not correspond with Ihe signature on the registration card, three 011 the ground that the declaration was not signed by the voter, five 011 the ground that clause (b) of the declaration was deleted, oue on the ground that there was no declaration in ihe prescribed form, and two because 110 declaration was made by the voter. Twentv-four posiul votes were dhallenged under similar headings while it was alleged that two declaration votes had been wrongly disallowed aikl onq, declaration vote wrongly allowed. Challenged By ijabour. A list of 1.15 votes challenged by respondent includeJ eieveu allegedlv residing outside the houndaries of Raglan, seven Jacking three months' qualification, 22 who had removed and qualiiied in another electorate, and 15 whose true place of residenee was outside the electorate. Respondent \s list named seven voters as .Maoris, one as in infant and one as not being a British subject. Mr. Baxter claimed that six votes declared informal by the Magisterial recount were, in fact, valid votes for respondent while four counted as valid votes for petitioner ought to have been disallowed. Dealing with absentee votes, respondent objected to six 011 the ground that the wrong electorate was filled in, live because a paragraph of the declaration was struek out, two because they were unsigned by the voter, eight because they were unsigned by the deputy returning oflicer, and one because of the declaration made. There are objections to 16 postal votes under vqrious headings, to the disailowance of one declaration vote and lo two voters allegedly disqualilied. by their employment. Determination of Maoris. A suggestion that the task of determining the racial qualification of the 26 voters objected to (19 hy petitioner and 7 by respondent) as Maoris, should be delegated to the Native Land Court, was made by Mr. Sim during his opening address. He 'said proof in such cases was a diitieult matter although petitioner belicved he could furnish conclusive evidence. The Native Land Court was sitting this week at Ngaruawahia and if it were asked to examine the status of the alleged Maoris, it inight complete in two days a task whieh could well occupy the Electoral Court itself for a niuch longer period There was authority for the step he proposed to be taken, 'said Mr. Sim, in making formal applieatiojn to that eft'eet, The Beneh did not give an immediate deeision on the matter. Instancing votes allowed at the re eount as valid for respondent to whieh objection - was taken, Mr. Sim s.aid one voter wrote opposite Mr. Johnstone's

name: "Had it. A serutiny would shoAv that the writer could be jdenti fied, thus destroying the seereey of. th* ballot. In another case a voter attempte to rub out pencil marks made throUg] Mr. Johnstone's name with the resul. that the voter's mtention was noi elear. An interesting coincidence was re vealed liy the Chief Justiee jhst be't'or the luncheon adjournment when Mr Sim was discussing the case of a person who obtainecl two voting papers and: used them both. At the recount tlu, ; Magistrate held that the first of tlu two should be counted. The Chief Justiee recalled that abou 1918 a man whose surname was Raglai was convicted of voting several time; under diff'ereut names including his own. The Court oi' Appeal held, ho\y ever, that Raglan was entitled to on vote under his own name. :' Signatures Compared Mr. Sim said a person recording a vote as an absentee was given a pape. bearing the names of the candidates 1 The voter struck' out the names not re quired and the voting paper was thei. placed in one envelope whieh in tnrn was encloscd in a larger envelope whic'n included a declaration with the signa ture 011 the voter's registration cairn but in a number of cases the signatim 011 the declaration did not correspom. with that on the registration card. There were. also several cases wher« married women had not furnished theii ■ married signature on the registratiou , card and the registfar, therefore, han manifestly been ilnable to discharge hi.duty of comparing a voter's two signa tures and seeing that they were identical. Similar instances of lack of corres pondence between registration ani'i declaration signatures had been foum. among the posial votes. ... klr. Sim, concluding his opening sub missions, said there were eight casen: wherc both partTes objected to the sanie vote and they. agreed that in these eight cases the vote was bad. The Chief Justiee: Are these apart from the 18 you mentioned this moni- i ing? Mr. Sim: One' falls into that categor.v but there are seven others apart from tliat gr oup. His Henour:' You have not reaehedj agreement about any others? Mr. Sim: Not yet, sir. First Witness It was 3..''0 p.m. before the lirsi witness was called. Jle was Bruee Nelson Beechey, a miner, who said th a: on his return froni overseas he lived at his mother's h'ome in Pukemiro in the Raglan electorate where he voted in the by-eelctiBh*. After his marriage' in April, .1946, lie went to live at Russell Road, Huntly . (in the Hauraki electorate) but continued to work a: Pukemiro. Ile and his wife — she was registered in the Hauraki electorate — frequentlv visited the home of hiw motlier in Pukemiro for weelc-ends, j To Mr. Cleary Beechey said he wenr | to live at Huntly after his marriage be- | cause he had no home of his own and because he was expeeting to receive a; rehabilitation loan for farming for whieh he had been approved. His be Jongings were partly in Pukemiro and partly in Huntly. To the Chief Justiee witness said hc thought he was. quite right in remain ing on the Raglan rolT. He had no given the matter a second thought ih voting in Raglan at the General Elee tion. Formal evidence of Beechey beinY registered as having voted in Raglan was given. Mr. Cleary said the evidence in this case had not established that the. voter concerned had given up his domicile in Raglan whcreas Mr. Toinp kins contended that Beechey 's regula! home since his marriage was in Huntly. The Bench indicated that it would reserve deeision in regard to the eligibility of individual contested votes. Dealing with two other voters whose residential eligibility was challenged by petitioner, .Tohn Vivian Phillips aml Laurence Joseph Phillips, Mr. Sim said the facts agreed upon by both eounsel were that both these voters were inem» liers of J Force and as such voted in Japan for the Raglan electorate. Their family home near Taupiri was outside the Raglan electorate. While thoso facts were agreed upon, said M r, Sim he understood Mr. Cleary wished to jnake submissions as to the elfect upon these two votes of a section of tlu Electoral Amendment Act, 1940, witn voting by servieemen. Mr. Cleary wi-ll be heard when the Co„urt resumes at 10 a.m. tomorrow.