TAUMARUNUI & HAWKE'S BAY

Dominion, Volume 8, Issue 2394, 25 February 1915, Page 6

TAUMARUNUI & HAWKE'S BAY

INTERESTING EVIDENCE AT TE KUITI METHODS OF J. B. YOUNG AKE 600 ELECTION CLAIMS ALLOWABLE ?

IBf Tclegrißli.—Special Eeporter.) Te Kulti, February 24. The third day's hearing of the Taumarunui election petition was completed here this evening before Their Honours Mr. Justice Cooper and Mr. Justice Cfiapmau. The petitioner is Mr. C. K. Wilson, the Reform candidate, whose objection is against the return for Taumarunui of Mr. W. '!. Jennings, the nominee of the Opposition Pany. Counsel for the petitioner is Mr. A. H. Johnstone, with whom is Mr. J. Sharpies, and counsel for the .respondent is G. P. Finlay. Prior to the rising of the Court on Tuesday afternoon Their Honours had heard the -argument of counsel on the point raised by Mr. Finlay that the petition could not be proceeded with because, he oontended, ■ the petition had been lodged late. Their Honours had reserved this point, and when proceed-, ings were resumed this morning, Mr. Johnstone reopened the subject, by drawing attention to a new phase. He submitted that Mr. Finlay's point 'was itself out of time, and that'the proper procedure would have been to have bad •tho question now raised decided by the Supreme Court. The petition had come to this Court, and was therefore within the jurisdiction of this Court.

Mr. Justice Cooper; If the point is raised late 'it may' affect the question of costs, but cannot give the Court a jurisdiction which it does not possess. Mr. Justice Chapman: It soems that this Court must inform itself, if no other Court does. Doubts About Soldiers' Votes. The Court then went on with the taking of evidence, and Mr. Johnstone called Francis Edward Lamb, Town Clerk of 'i'e Kuiti, who was deputyreturning officer at. the Municipal Hall booth. Mr. Lamb gave evidence to the effect that on polling day a man went into the <booth and asked for a voting paper, but as the man's name was not on the roll a paper was refused : him, and later on Mr. Jennings came along and asked why this man had been refused.

James Ennis Hull, an officer, in the Electoral Department, stated that he took the following polls of .members of the Expeditionary. Force: —At Palmerston North Camp, on September 5; at Samoa, on October. 12, 13, 14, and 15; at Trentham, on December 1; on H.M.S. Psycho and Troopship No. 15, on December 2. ' Witness said that, the list of names was supplied by the chief electoral officer, who had received them from the various registrars. , Mr. Johnstone: There are some names here without even initials or addresses. Can ..you account for that in any. way? Witness: l ean ,only ; say/that it may be thelist of names for the Auckland camp, where I did not.take the poll.. Mr. Johnstone': There are whole rows of names on this list, Your Honours, without an initial or an address.

Mr. Justice Cooper remarked that perhaps , this was an omission which was covered in the Expeditionary Force Voting Act by the clause regarding irregularities. Mr. Hull, continuing, said that the duty of the poll clerk was to mark on the roll tlie s names and addresses of the soldiers who voted. Mr. Johnstone: Can you offer any explanation as to why large numbers of names -have no addresses? , , Witness: The only explanation- I.can offer i 6 that in those cases there was failure on the part of the deputy to take the addresses. Mr. Justice Cooper: There are only about eight without addresses. Mr. Johnstone: Oh, no. There is a whole list more at the end. We don't know where they came from. Mr. Justice Chapman: So there are, and they are the Auckland men. Mr. Justice Cooper: The Auckland deputy-did not take any addresses at all it seems.- ■ Witness: Apparently not. More About Mr. Jennings at the Booth. James Boddie, Mayor of Te Kuiti, deposed .that on polling day he''was frequently in the vicinity of the Municipal Hall polling booth. Mr. Jennings approached him and said that he did not consider the accommodation at the' booth sufficient for the„ voters marking the papers. Witness said the 'matter was one entirely for the Registrar of Electors, but that he would endeavour to see the Registrar (Mr. F. J. Schramm) with a view to attempting to rectify' anything which was wroiig. Witness was informed by Mr. Lamb that so far there had been no difficulty at the booth. While there witness observed Mr. Jennings inside the booth talking to an old lady. Mr. Finlay asked witness where Mr. Wilson' really i resided. Mr. Boddie': Since I have come here I have on numerous occasions wished to get into communication with Mr. Wilson, and I have found him a most difficult man to reaqh. When I met him first, four and a half years ago, he was living on his farm-at "Piopio. Mr. Johnstone then closed his case subject to his being allowed to put in rolls to show that Mr. Jennings was on no other roll in New Zealand than the Taumarunui roll. - This is because it-is contended that Mr. Jennings was wrongly on the Taumarunui roll, and therefore was in reality not properly on any roll, and consequently ineligible to be a candidate for the seat. 1 Respondent's Case Opened. , Mr. Finlay, in opening the case for the respondent, said that the most , serious allegation in the petition was the count in which it was said that over 300 more ballot-papers were discovered than there 1 were people marked off the roll. The chief evidence in support of this was that of Mr. Hodgkins, DeputyChief Electoral Officer, and he had qualified his evidence by saying that such discrepancies were common experiences at elections. Mr. Justice Chapman: He did not go that far. Mr. Justice Cooper: No. He only said that similar mistakes often occurred. Mr. Justice Chapman: He did not'say that the mistakes occurred to so great an extent. Mr. Finlay: Well, I will deal with the question later on. Mr. Finlay said that the counterfoils* wero a special provision of the new Act, and should be checked, and that in order to protect the secrecy of the ballot to Hie utmost degree the ballot-papers should be opened only as a last resort. Would the Discrepancies Turn tho scale? Mr. Justice Cooper: I think that Mr. Justice Chapman said the other day that the ballol>papers would only bo opened as a final resort. Mr Finlay: I thank Your Honours for reminding me. , Mr. Finlay said that with regard to the allegations of dual voting ho would call evidence that a number 1 of them had not voted twicc. The question of whothoi' Mr. Jonaiims or was r.ot entitled to be a, candidate was more a

matter for legal argument than for evidence, and it was a point which did 'liot help the petitioner in his demand for a scrutiny. He took it that the Court would not order a scrutiny unless there was some possibility of. the result of the scrutiny upsetting the election. If all the votes disputed as irregular _ were, counted, they would not be suffioient to wipe out Air. Jennings's majority. Mr. Justice' Chapman: There are a great many. Mr. Finiay: There are the 134 votes Mr. Schramm gave evidence about, ar.d G6 dual voters, and if all these wore counted out Mr. Jennings would still have a majority of , five. Mr. Justice Cooper: There are the aliens to add.. < .

Mr. Finiay: Furthermore you have to deduct 24 from Mr. Schramm's 134 because they did not vote. ■ Mr. Justice Cooper: If you are going to make an arithmetical calculation you must take in every one. Mr. Finiay: I have, arid as Mr. Jennings would still- have a majority of 29, 1 submit that the request for a scrutiny can't be' granted, a-s it would not' be right to hold a scrutiny merely to satisfy a curiosity as to wliat the majority really was. Counsel said that he would easily be able to show that what had occurred at Mahirakau could -not have affected the result of tho election. Tho irregularity at the Brixton booth, vhere Arthur Crawford helped the officer in charge, was meian and trifling as a ground. Coming to tho charge that Mr., Jennings had gone into the polling booth at To Kuiti, Mr. Finiay said that in England a candidate had a right to go into a booth. .

Mr. justice Cooper: Has he a right to remain in? ' \ Mr. Finlay: Yes ; if he does not talk. That is the provision of the Act. Mr. Justice Cooper: A candidate is allowed to go into a booth in England, but is specially disallowed in New Zealand. Mr. Finlay said'that in any case Mr. Jennings had no dishonest purpose when entering the tooth, and that the matter was too small to have any effect on the election. As to the alleged methods of James Burns Young, no endeavour had been made by.Mr. Johnstone to establish as a fact that Young was an agent of Mr. Jennings. The real fact was that Young was not Jennings's agent, but the agent of the. Licensed Victuallers' Party. The Methods of a canvasser. Here occurred the turn which gave the case an entirely, new complexion. Mr. Justice Cooper remarked in effect that apart from the question of agency the methods of Young were of great importance in the case. Mr. Justice Cooper: The Court is entitlod to infer that many of tie ballot papers bearing Young's attestation wero attested in blank, for :f a man would attest four in blank,: and four have been" proved, does it not- throw doubt on. the • whole sis hundred he attested? :

Mr. Justice Chapman: Beyond the four there were several attempts that never i matured.

Mr. Johnstone: Twenty. , Mr. Justice .Cooper: If a' man is ■ capable of putting his, signature to a solemn document as the witness of another signature which he has not seen ina"de, what, reliance can be placed on any document attested by such a man? I merely mention that as a point touched on by Mr. Johnstone, and four of these attestations have been distinctly proved. ... - Mr. Justice Chapman: That doesn't depend on proof of agency. , Mr. Finlay: -No. But.it is what an. independent person may do in the interest of the licensing cause. Mr. Justice Cooper: Supposing this was a general practice on this man's part, might it not affect the whole of the six "nundred papers - which- it is said, bore his attestation? We want your assistance in argument on this point, Mr. Finlay. You have not" touched on it, you know. ; Mr. Justice Chapman: That does not depend ,on connecting Mr. • Jennings with Young. ' Mr. Justice Cooper: Not at all. Mr. Justice Chapman: It is the exfont which the roll 1 is vitiated. Mr. Justice Chapman: Suppose some interloper in this district (no matter in wliich interest) did collect six hundred or an unknown proportion of : 600 bogus papers',-and did ( get an unknown proportion of 600 people on the roll by means of'bogus papers. l am putting an extreme case that does not depend on connecting* Mr. Jennings with these bogus papers. It may be that the roll is vitiated.

Mr. Finlay: Quite go. I did not think of that point before. Mr. Justice Cooper: I thought you didn't. Mr. Finlay said that Mr. Wilson, the petitioner, could interview some of the 600. Mr. Justice Chapman: Do you mean to say that he must go to that extent for a thing of this kind? Mr. Finlay: It is unfortunate, but the onus of proof is on him. Mr. Justice Coopor: Agency has nothing to do with'this. During the afternoon Their Honours expressed the opinion, that they should following the Napier. precedent of examining the counterfoils, -and between '5 and 6 o'clock the Court rose for this purpose till 10 a.m. to-morrow (Thursday). .