RAGLAN EVIDENCE MAY END FRIDAY

Chronicle (Levin), 1 May 1947, Page 8

RAGLAN EVIDENCE MAY END FRIDAY

-Pre&s AssQciatiQi

iy Telegrayh-

— . HAMILTON, April 30. Evidenee -in anotlier twelve eases-o. voteis ehallenged by respondent • a laeking proper residential qualifieation in some respect, ywas heard by tn. Electorai Court today-. Electors wh. were called to the witness box inelude severaf who spent their time 1 partl. vvithin the Raglan eleetorate and party elsewhere. Tlie court is being asked tdetermine in which eleetorate the., were cjuaiified. , Before the court adjourned, Mr- T P. Cleary, for respondent, told the Bench he was coniident that the evi denee he would be ealling would b eompieted on Priday. - An unusual situation faced th Court. The petitionef was seelcing t take up the elia.llenge of a woman '. vote after cou'iisel for the responden > had announced he was abandoning hi listed ehallenge against her and wa pursuing tlrat lodged against her hus band 's vote. The matter nrose when Mr. T. F Cleary,- for Mr. Baxter, announced- tha he did not wish to proceed with th ehallenge against Hazel Olive Barelay. but would eall evidence to support tli ehallenge against Edward Charles Bar clay. "I desire to take up the .case of Mrs Barelay," said "Mr. W. J. Sim, K.C. senior counsel for the petitioner, Mi Hallyburton Joimstone. Mr, Sim said that there were preeedents in two pr-e vious election .petition eases in Neri Zealand for, one si'de to take np an ob ' jection abandoned by the other side. Mr. Cleary quoted an English author ity on electofal petition proeedure as stating that the course proposed by Mr. Sim could be folloaed only with the permission of the Court in exeeptiona1 eases. "The rules provide that neithei party cari add to his list of objections exeept with yhe consent of thg Court If one party eould take up an objee tion abandoned by the otker it would be a ieft-handed way of tdding to h'i.list," said. Mr, Cleary, who elaimed that kacl Mr. Sim so wished to apply for leave to acTd to his list the prope time to do so would have been befort elosing the petitioner 's case, Mr. Sim asked for the opporhunity to make further submissions in supporj of his application. He said the Eng lish case quoted by Mr. Cleary was heard in 1.8,92, whereas New Zealand preeedents were more up to dcte. "Tho matter has considerable importance as Y our Hononrs may surmise, " said Mr Sim. The Court agfeed to hear evidenc{! from Barelay, which would also be ap plieable to his._^ijfe's ease if Mr. Sim's request was grjinted.