WAIRAU ELECTION PETITION.

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1380, 5 March 1912, Page 6

WAIRAU ELECTION PETITION.

PRELIMINARY PROCEEDINGS. " FURTHER PARTICULARS-ASKED FOR, (By Tclesraptt—Press Association.) Dunedin, March 4* To-day .Mr. Justice Williams heard the summons issued at tho instanco of Mr. B. M'Calliim, M.P. for Wairau, asking for further particulars of charges made in tho petition against his return on the ground of corrupt and illegal practices. Substantial matters in respect of which particulars wero required were the names and addresses and 1 particulars on the roll of electors who wero alleged to have been treated, nnd the place or places where the treating was alleged to have taken place. Also for the terms of certain wagers alleged to havo been made and for particulars of Mr. M'Callum's expenses ulleged to bo in excess of statutory limit of £200. It also requested particulars of contracts for vehicles alleged to have been employed on polling days. Mr. W. C. Macgregor appeared in support of the summons and Mr. J. It. Hosking, K.C., for petitioners (Wm. Cart, John O'Sullivnn, and John Lnnkow). Mr. M'Gregor said tho petition alleged that at Picton, Havelock, Marlborough, Okaromoi, Seddon, and Mirza, M'Cnllum provided meat, drink, entertainment and alcoholic liquor to a large number of electors to induce them to vote for hira. Respondent asked for the date or dates of the occurrences, names, addresses, and numbers on th» rolls of those nllogod-to have been treated, tho places where they wero treated, and for the manner, in which M'Callum was connected with this as accessory. Mr. Hosking said lie thought the places had been sufficiently stated. This was a charge of general treating. Possibly in many cases they would bo unable to give any particulars. Mr. M'Gregor: These cases should bo struck out. He contended that the petition should set out full particulars. Details wero also required regarding the allegation that on December 7 large quantities of liquor wero supplied by M'Callum or his agents at Grovo Road, Blenheim. '

In reply to his Honour' Mr. Hosking said ho thought to some extent they wero entitled to further particulars. Mr. M'Gregor asked for details regarding tho allegation ' that at Seddon, on Decerabßr 7 and U, large quantities of drink were supplied by R. M'Callum or his agents, and that an agent of M'Callum importuned, electors, inquired for whom they were going to vote, and gave them beer. Also, regarding tho allegation that at Mirza, after tho first ballot, Archibald M'Callum gave certain electors money to buy liquor in order to bribe them. Then there, was the allegation that R. M'Callum mado contracts for payment for conveying electors to tho poll. He also asked for details regarding the allegation that M'Callum's expenses exceeded .£2OO at the first ballot and .£SO at tho second, and the allegations that wagers made on the election caused votes to bo cast for M'Callum, and that a school teacher named Humphrey, of Scddon, was employed as canvasser for payment or promise of payment. His Honour made an order in terms of tho summons except as to certain amendments. The parts struck out were: (1) As to the manner in which Richard M'Callum was alleged to have been accessory to treating. (2) As to contracts for convoyanco of electors. (3) Exact terms and conditions of wagers. (4) With regard to payments to Humphreys. His Honour ordered that particulars as to election expenses bo to the best of petitioner's knowledge and belief, also that petitioners oro precluded from giving evidence in support of auy chargo or ' case in which particulars havo not been delivered. Except by leave of tho trial Court, particulars to bo supplied on or before Saturday, March 9, costs of summons to bo paid by petitioners to respondent.