A DISPUTED ELECTION.

Dominion, Volume 1, Issue 209, 28 May 1908, Page 6

A DISPUTED ELECTION.

MOUNT COOK SCHOOL COMMITTEE. PETITION TO THE BOARD. Tho outstanding feature of the annual school committee elections which were held ill April las.ii throughout tho Wellington district was the monster meeting of householders of the Mount Cool; School District. During the nomination of candidates for olection to the committee, the qualifications of certain aspirants to offico were questioned, it being contended that they were ineligible by reason of the fact that, they wore not householders residing' within" tlio limits of the school district.' Mr.' T. M. Murphy, secretary of tlio committee, was unable to produce the official boundaries of 'the district, and so recited them from memory. .His statement of. tho boundaries was contradicted by a certain section, but the chairman ruled that the secretary's statement must be accepted. Tlio committee was duly elected, and now comes tho aftermath—a petition to tho Wellington Education Board asking for an inquiry as to tho true position of affairs. The petitioners state that many householders in the Mount Cook School District were disfranchised by the chairman's ruling, and eligible nominated resident householders were denied the suffrages of the resident householders of tho district. THE ACT QUOTED. . . The Education Acts Compilation Act, 1904 provides :— . (a) Section 102—" All school districts under the provisions of the Education Act, ] 877, or any Act or Ordinance thereby repealed, shall be school, districts for tho purpose of this ■ Act Until , altered as herein provided. The map in the Wellington Education Board office clearly defines the boundaries of r e "l D 6ton city school districts, and: these boundaries have not been altered (it is stated) for thirty years. On the map, Cuba Street, from Webb Street to 1 the Harbour, is shown : as. one of. the existing western boundaries of the Mount Cook School District, "being bounded by the eastern side of' Cuba Street for its entire length to the sea. . ' ' ■j (b) Section 103 provides: That every x householder of a school district is qualified to vote at any election of members of the School Committee for such dis- ■ tricfc; provided that in the case of busband andwife any qualification .pos? sessed by either of them shall be deemed to be possessed'by each of them. (c) Section 104: Every resident householder in a school district, and no other person, is qualified to be elected a member of the School Committee for such • district. *' THE CHAIRMAN'S ACTION. ' Some of the resident householders, state the petitioners, who were "nominated, at the meeting, and, by word of mouth," were asked by the, chairman if they consented to be so nominated, and were also' asked their plaoe of residence,, but not so in every . case; ' several names were struck off tho blackboard by tho chairman's orders, be-, cause they did not reside .in the, Mount Cook , school district; at least, two candidates were riot challenged, and they were subsequently elected. They were:—John Patrick Hyland, messengor, 177 Cuba Street, in the Te"~Aro . school , djstrict, and Thomas Henry Hogg, \ baker, 84 Abel. Smith Streett, also in that district. ' Messrs. J. F. Kucli, Cuba Street, and Archibald Wilson, Cambridge ; Terrace, vainly contended that they were .'eligible, but were unable to obtain satisfaction, tho chairman of the meeting, Mr. Noot,'ruling' that those who were riot? satisfied could appeal to the Board. . ■ THE CONDUCT OF THE ELECTION. " The petitioners also assert that the oonduct of the'election "was" not in accordance with the s -provisions of : the'Act', that there" were' presont young persons of both sexes who were obviously not householders, others who had no status, and that the chairman took no steps to satisfy himself as to the bona-fidea ' • of the electors. •, \ .. ..., ' ..; -.' Tho petitioners also allege that tho action of the headmaster (Mr. Foster) and His assistants in actively assisting at the election by handing out tickets was a grave error of judgment and an act of supererogation, as he ; had iio right' whatever to assume the pro .'' rogative ■ and functions which were solely those of the chairman. The whole, procedure of the . ballot, the petitioners state, was, illegal. There was no privacy. The ballofcbox, by the chairman's order, was taken to' the dogr of exit' and held by Mr. i Charles Reid, one of the candidates for election.' The chairman (Mr. Noot), remained at tho far end of the room, and did not. follow the ballot-box. Scrutineers wero appointed, but , thby wore not present at the ballot-box. The voting had boon going on for some, considerable time,, when Mr. Chisholm (one of the signatories to the petition), while at the ballot-box, saw a lady put" in two cards; ho challenged ■ tho vigilance of Mr. Reid, and .recalled the lady, who admitted that she had; put in two cards., "Plumping" is also alleged. One youth, when retiring, shouted, " Forty of us plumped for Lodge r The signatories, to tho petition are as follow:— ; : , John Friedrich- Kuch, 153 Cuba■ Street; Archibald Wilson, 54 _ Cambridge Terrace j /James Besant, 29 : EUice Avenue; Henry Oscar Hewett,' 10 Banks Terrace; George Matheson Ewart, la Hopper Street; George Paradise, 11 Brougham Avenue; John Arthur Chisholm, 19 Thompson Street; James Robinson. 2 Cambridge Avenue; Alexander Pringlo : Smith,' 40a Ellice Avenue; Alexander Ballingall, 110 Austin Street; William" Edward Nichols,-23, Ellice Avenue; Augustine JosephDurnsy, 8 Moir Street; Robert Thompson Caldow, 45 Ellice Street; James Rumgay, 2 Tainui Torrace; Thomas Henry M'Gann, 35 Tasman Street.