VALIDITY OF VOTES BY WIFE AND HUSDAND

Chronicle (Levin), 1 May 1947, Page 8

VALIDITY OF VOTES BY WIFE AND HUSDAND

press AssQciation

By Felegrapiii—i

HAMILTON, May 1. When a liugb&hd and wife had voted under'^the same' cifcumstances it woiMd-'be unfair for the court- to'";disailow 'the -husband's vote while his wife's vote, for some technical-or procedural reason, was allowed to 'Temain valid, said the Chieff Justicp, Sir Humphrey O'Leary, in the Electoral Court today. He was giving a ruling on the application mjade yesterday by Mr. W. J. Sim, K.p., for the petitioner, concerning the vote of Hazel Olive Barelay. When Mr. T. P. Cleary said that respondent was abandoning his ehallenge against Mrs. Barelay while pursuing his ob jection to the votes of her husband, Edward Charles Barelay, Mr. 'Sim asked for leave to take up the ehallenge aeainst Mrs. Barelay, The Chief Justice, in announcing this morning the assent of the Bench to Mr'. Sim's request, said there were very soecial- circumstances in this case entitling the Court to give leave, as requested by counsel,-, for. petitioner to take up the ehallenge. The votes of the husband and wife were recorded in the same circumstances. It appeared on the evidence presented, although subject to any submissions which might be made; that the court would have to disallow the vote of the husband. It would be unfair in that case if the wife's vote were allowed to remain valid. Mr. Sim, acknowledging the leave given by the Bench, said .that the ob jection against Mrs. Barelay could nerhaps be considered by the court "without it being technically regarded as an addition to the petitioner's list. It would have been trifling with the court, said Mr. Sim, to have expected it to adjudicate upon the vote of the husband and not upon that of the wife. The court heard evidence toda^ i in more eases of electors whose ve1 sidential qualifications were callec in question. Three eases of this nature were abandoned by respond? ent. _