Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

THE STRATFORD SEAT

i ELECTION PETITION v FINAL MEETING ')> RESPONDENT GIVES EVIDENCE • ; ' ..;„,...,,_ r , . , v i■, By" Telegraph-Special Keporter.' : Stratford, March 17. • ■ 'The •'Bearing' of "the Stratford election ■ pelifion'was continuecTTo-aay before the Chief Justice and Mr. Justice Chapman. ■'■ Mr 31 ilyers.appeared for the petitioners, and Sir 'John Findlayf K.C., with ', him Mr.''P.'/Levi, for the respondent, .Kobert-rMasters. ' ~. !' • ' The first business'of the day. was the receipt of the result of the examination of counterfoils by the Registrar of the Court' and the returning officer. ;■' This"- examination revealed -".that there were 22 counterfoils with- * !-. ; out roll numbers. Of these _ 11 '; ■ -were ordinary oases, 9 were 6oldiers " • votes unsupported by written applications as required by the; Act, and two were soldiers' votes'supported by applications! further evidence of and concerning aliens was taken. The result of the inquiry into the status qf aliens was that of all the aliens whose votes were questioned by either side,.3o wero proved to ; have,, no right to vote. There were still some cases undetermined awaiting fre3U ' evidence or argument as to the law. .Sir, John Findlay 6aid that he had e'vidence'to attack votes'by persons residing' outside the district, but if all the aliens' votes disallowed proved 'to bo for respondent, and if all the', papers with unnumbered counterfoils showed votes for "Masters and were struck out, as well as the votes of tho members of tho orchestra, Mr. Masters,was still in a ma- . jority of 16.'For, this-reason he suff-. .-' gested that - it. might not be necessary to attack any mora individual votes, Mr. Myers said thai: the result, of'the investigation left the case' to be determined on the question of corrupt practices. He would mako such use as he ". thought fit of the narrowness of the majority in reference' to of the-question of whether the practices, al-' leged to be corrupt affected the "lection. - .Evidence on Individual Votes. V "Sir 'John Findlay said that in view of ~ Mr. Myers's declaration' that he would rely:-,bn the narrowness of the majority ■ and'make some use of the hypothetical figures just put to the Court, ho'must for: the sake of .caution call evidence v on individual votes. ..■'Some evidence'was. taken on.pno or two such votes.. * ■. ■-. ' James Mntolister, photographer and musician, said that ho was. a member • of Masters's committee. He remembered the night in the Town Halt on October 30, and he was one of the orches- ' tra of "four who played that night. He . had suggested to Mr. Fox, whose orches- ; tra he-had. previously played, in, that • 6orae,;.musi6 would be acoeptable,; and ; witness asked him .to' arrange to have ',' two or three players there to play. No- , thing was said then about payment and • ; nothing : . was suggested. The orchestra 1 '• rfayed for about a quarter of an hour. There were a violin, a double bass vio- > lin, .a,'.'piano,- and a small drum. Mr. ■■• Masters knew nothing about this arrangement before it was made, but'he ' told Masters before the meeting what he had done,/' saying nothing about payment. ' The other three players left the building when the Mayor.took the chair. but witness remained.' A few daw after the meeting witness saw Fox; and askli if he was going to 'make a charge. he thought not./ Witness said that' this was hardly fair, as Fox made .hie-living this way. Fox said: "Oh, well, , say five shillings each." He gave Fox 15s„ all out of his bwn ( pocket. Witness had mada.no,claim on Masters for this money. No .one had refunded the money . to him.' ( The business had been forgotten ■ untirth;s petition came along in January. "' ''Questions About a Receipt, ' .<!.'Tb : .'Mr.'.:Myers: It was recalled to his mind when-:jie heard from Fox that Young had interviewed him and told him there was going, to be' trouble about it... He got a.Tecdipt from Fox at that time, dated, November 3, the putting in of- tijs, bein» at witness's suggestion. He denied, that-he had told Fox that there was goiM 'to* be trouble about the business,.'and that he had better have a rcocipt. It was Fox who said something about trouble over the affair, and wit- : ness who suggested a receipt. Fox told witness that he had told loung that he ■ had been paid by Gardner, but Fox re- ' garded.-this'-as a joke. He first spoke to Fox about getting an orchestra two or three days before the meoting. Although he was a member of Masters's executive' ■icommittee, ho did not discuss this with any other member of the committee. He , 'did-tell" Master's r a day or. two . before 'the* meeting./' Masters did not ask -who ■ was--paying,- but he knew that. Fox was in, chaTge'„.of,, the orchestra.' ,F6x was ••known in Stratford as a professional musician, v but -Masters did not ask about ' payment! The object of the committee was to gat a good meeting, but the music could have had no effect on the size of \ the meeting, because tho fact that music ,w.as;to,be;proyided was not announced. •Mr. Myers: Will you swear that it was not.announced? ... ' ; Witness: Yes. Counsel: 'Information of it rould not hove .heerrgiven to the paper except by. you 6r" ; blasters. Witness: "It might have been given by Fox." / Witness also said that he got the receipt soon after the interview with •Young.' ;'lt'was not quite recently, and It was not.suggested by Masters. .'•.,- ■ Jushco Chapman: He, got the ■receipt when he. learned that inquiries .were going on about the matter. To.'■■■ Mr., MyoTs: Ho knew < that the .petition; was coming on. , Ho trusted Fox, and knew,,there would bo no trouble with him about the payment. He was -not'afraid of another demand by Fox 1 for payment, but in view of the inquiries going on witness thought it was wise to [ get a record that he (witness) hadpaid the money. Mr. Myers: I suggest to you that you. got this receipt because Fox told you that' he had told Young he got the money from Gardner. Witness: That bad no influence on my getting the receipt. ■y < Counsel: But he had told vou he said that.-, Counsel: Did yon -think it would be a more serious matter for Mr. Gardner to pay the money than for you to pay it? Witness: That did not occur'to mo. , The Chief Justice: Does that matter? ' Mr. Myers: I don't think so, I am satisfied with the admission that Maealister paid the money. The Chief Justice: I don't think it ' makes a bitof difference who paid it. Mr. Myers (to'witness): I suppose von w.ere annoyed with ' Fox about saying nnvthing about it? Witness: No. I thbuzht ho was foolish to tell a falsehood about it.- N - Counsel: I suppose you' can't susgest any reason for that falsehood? . Witness: No, it was a falsehood. The Charge for Advertising. Henry Gardner,, store assistant in the employ of Robert Masters, said that ho was secretary to Mr. Masters's commit-, tee. and did all tho business of the com-'-mittee % in connection with the election, including the certifying of accounts. He remembered the free pictures.. Ho had not seen the advertisement, but he had' a discussion with Mr. Ward, manager of the picture tlfeatre, about it. He sawMr. Ward at the newspaper office, and told him there that it was not necessary to advertise the pictures, as Mr. Masters could fill the hall without resorting to free pictures. Witness advised Mr. Ward that it would be good business to the theatre cnmpanv to ad- .'. yertise tho nictures. but Mr. Ward did not then make a definite answer. He Erst saw the advertisement three weeks ago when'-Mr. Masters enme to him with •-«. clipping of it, and said. "You've nearly, got me into a pretty mess; lotting me nay'for'dMiings thntr'djm/folipjnng to me." Mr. Masters told liim of tho flcm in tho .account for advertising, and ' .witness explained that ho had not : thought of this item being the free pictures advertisement. Tie told Mr. Masters of 'his conversation with Mr. Ward about tho advertisement. Ho had nothing to do with tho arrangements about the jnuiio fa? the meeting on October

(JO, but ho heard .of it before tho meeting, ho»did not know from whom. "It was 'mare a Tumour than anything else." To M". Myers: Witness was employed bv Masters, Limited. ■ ■ • 'Mr. Myers produced tho file of the newspaper to show through witness that Mr. Masters began to advertise- his meetings od October 10. mid made Ins first address on October U. Witness said that I-he'engaged the halls as secretary. ■He engaged the Town Hall for. the meeting on October M.-.but he did not engage the. picture theatre for the night before the election. -Jto tried to pencil tho Town Hall for this' night, but Mr. Hme had ahead" pencilled it. Owing to this Mr. Masters had to take the picture show. Witness was not Present at the free pictures meeting of December 1G until 8.30. Tho arrangements were in charge of the picture show people. Masters could have filled the theatre without free pictures. Mr. Myers: Then, if Mr. Masters could have filled the hall in any case, what advantage were the picture people to set from this advertisement? Witnns«: I don't know. Counsel: Was there any advantage? Witness: Looking at it from your point of view, there would hot. v Mr. Myers: But you have told tho Court, that vou suggested in conversation to Ward that this company would got Advantage bv advertising. Witness: I said it was a matter for his own consideration. Mr. Mvers: You have told tho Court, sir. that,vou advised Ward to advertise. What were tho advantages ? , Witness: Those I have already told vou. . ■'„■„'' Mr. Mvers: What were they? Witness told them again in the same words as ha hadxused in the first instance. Witness said that he watched advertisements and paragraphs about the election. Ho did not see the free pictures advertisement when it appeared, nor could ho swear that he saw the paragraph in (the "local" column announcing it. ! He could not remember whether tho orchestra was advertised on October 30', nor could he remember whether there was any other announcement in tho baner about it. Witness first saw the account from the. Stratford 'Post' about January 24, a few days, after the petition was served, and ho i passed the account then. ' The Chief Justice, (to Mr. Myers): Does the advertisement matter ?-"The advertisement appeared, and they must be deemed to have seen it. Does ; the pavment for it matter? ~<. Counsel: I am satisfied with Your Honour's noint of vlew.j The Chief Justice:' Payment does not matter. Supposing payment had ,not been made? • , ~ , ~ Mr.'Mvers said that ho relied on the advertisement as showing the intent with which the free pictures meeting was arranged. ..,,,• ■ i Sir John Findlav said that in view of His Honour's observation he would be ibie to dispense with some witnesses, and so shorten the case. . Erneet Edgar Beid, biograph operator at the King's Kinema Theatre, said that ho beaan to show pictures- on the night of December 16 at five minutes to 8 o'clock, and he stopped the film at twentv-fivo minutes past eight. _ Only tho shorter, films were shown in that time. A full programme occupied two U»hts. v . -,j . I Hosbondont Gives Evidence. I . Kobert Masters, merchant, of Stratford, respondent to the petition, was first asked about the,music at the.Town Half,, meeting on October SO. All he knew about this music, he said, , was that, he heard the oTchestro was going to play, and. that he heard they did play, but he did not hear them &**■ Mnca '' ster had suggested a littie music to Seep the people in a good humour until witness, came to speak. He never author, ised.anv payment tothewpeople. When he applied for the King's Theatre he asked'for the hall and the option of the pictares and orchestra. , When the application was granted he was informed that whether he-jtook the pictures and orchestra or not he tvouW have to pay the average takings for the _ thirteen previous .Tuesdays., Continuing, ho said: "I exercised the option without the pictures. I cave no instructions tor the matures or orchestra to come on. Further than that I told ™™«t distinctly and nothing more that I would be thcr/at 8.30. I knew thefc were to ba pictures and music, because J heard so. \Thev were not provided f* h ,'"J instructions." ■ W hat be• hnd never authorised the free adverfement. and was not rwporeiMafoT »t in any way. He did not regard the meHrm»< valuable to him, because he was »egotisti.i»l ciough" to think that he could get an audience in Stratford withAlthough he did not authorise the pictures and orchestra he had/hoard that the, picture*, won Id be shown and the music played.. It vas general talk about the town, Mr. A[yers: And von took no steps to obioct to\H? __ i Witness: No. ~ .. , Counsel: Mr; Gardner has told us that you told him the pictures and orchestra were to be,used, _ , Witness: Quite likely I did. I had Counsel: Yon were master'of tho hall for that owning? n „a,» Witness: "Yes. I had hired the theatre, and I could do what I liked with it. Witness also'said that the meeting on October SO was his first big public meeting. He knew that music w to. he niWidod because ho had heard «!!•» fiom Macalister. , He did not know whether there was numbing about it in tho^ newspaper, but if there was it could not nave been inserted on information .given by him. . , .. , ' . Mr. Myers then read mute a low paragraph from the Stratford "Postf'of October 'SO about the ireehngof what evening. The notice told ™mettiin<r of what Mr. Master/? intended to talk about at the meeting, and announced lf.st ot all "From 7.30 an orchestra of seven players will provide selections." ■■ Witness still said that he did not give this information to tho newspaper, although it might have been given by hi? Bporetarv. He had never raised a Question about payment for the free pictures advertised until the matter was brought to his notice by his solicitor. Mr Coleman. That we* some days after the date Of arrvice pf the petition. Counsel Address the, Court. Sir John Findlav said that before addressing the Court ho would have to-refer to questions of law affecting votes m dieMr Myers said that he did,, not, think the time'of th* Court could be profitably token up with discussion of these matters, as the case would hnyo to turn on tho i=sue of corrupt practices. Sir John rimllay said that he was prepared to accept, this view, and, he proceeded to address the Court. He sai(l that tho decided cases had established that entertainment of a moderate kind was not to lie regarded as being corrupt in the absence of proof of this intention. At worst the aim of Masters could have been no mnro than to Ret a Hg audience. Tt was no part_ of his plan to infiuenco votes by giving to tho people a free entertainment. It would bo absurd to sav that free people in a wealthy district would be debauched by n free. show, that the people's votes would be influenced by this threepence-Worth of pictures. There was no evidence aT nlFthat Masters hoped to obtain this result. He would nsk Their Honours to find that Mr. Masters had no intention of using" theso devices to bribe the electors.. As to the employment of the orchestra', he did not know whether ' his friend would rely on the provision in the law against the employment of bands. Counsel submitted-that the provision regarding tho use of bands was - put into the law to prevent disturbances and free fights at elections. It was formerly tho cjvstom for .bands to parade the streets. 'eacnßand attracting a following, and clashes between these c'owds were not uncommon." He would argue that this orchestra was not a band at nil, merely a violin, a. double'bass, a clacked pijno and a little drum. Ho would further argue that the band was not used for the nurnose of the "lection, It would be difficult to contend that by the use of this snvill orchestra tho respondent sought to promote his election. Counsel asked Their Honours to find that there was entirely absent from Master's mind any iintehtinn to corrupt the electors. In actual fact the.election had bfn fought very fairly nnd cleanly by both sides. Question of Responsibility. Mr. Myers said that there were several principled upon which the petition would have to be decided. As the re-

suit of a finding of either a corrupt or illegal practice tho penalty would bo the voiding of- the election and the disqualification for a period of the candidate. There was no half-way houso when once it was shown that a corrupt, |or illegal practice had lieen proved. In' this respect our law differed from tho [ English, law. In England the Court had | in certain cases the power to grant relief, but the New Zealand Courts had not such power, and lie ventured to say that it was proper that there should be no doubt about the responsibilities of a candidate. second point was that a candidate was responsible for the acts of his agents. It was because, of this that ho had not stressed tho point of whether the orchestra was paid for by Mr, Gnrdnor, tho secretary of Mr. Master's committee, or by Mr. Macalister, a member of the- executive committee, because in either case M.r. Masters was responsible. He- would submit also that Mr. Ward was an agent of Mr. -Masters for the purpose of advertising the fiee picture show., Tho third point was as to where agency commenced. His contention was that agency might exist any length of time -fore, but a practice could not bo ho to be illegal ss distinct from corrivt: until a candidate came-before the electors.' Mr. Masters came before the eleciurs not later than October 10, and he made his first public address on October M. The electron campaign had commenced before October 30, and Masters was then capable of responsibility for acts of his. agents, even illegal or corrupt acts. Agency or period of candidature was not limited by the issuo of tho writ. The fourth point was that there was a difference between tho ingredients to constitute a corrupt practico and an illegal practice respectively. It was' i.ot the law that illegal practices could not be committed, without corrupt intention. This appeared to havo escaped tho attention of Sir John Eindlay. An illegal practice might bo any practice which the Legislature sought to. prevent regardless of tho intention of tho candidate. The tifth point was as to the meaning of the term "corrupt." Ho would argue that the giving of an entertainment could bo held to bo a corrupt practice uccording to the common law of Parliament. He quoted authorities in support of this, in which the giving of entertainment might be held to be corrupt. Tho Chief Justico, asked whether thero <vas authority for sayings that to' give a free picture show was a corrupt practice, a ' . Mr. Myers said that pictures were a new form of entertainment, and were not referred to in any older cases. Tho Chief Justice: Then you can't go to the eoramon'lnw of I'arliamsnt. Mr. Myers said that lie would, argne that the/ giving of an entertainment did come within the law. Ho would contend that the giviite of entertainments and the employment of bands had been held to bo bribery. There we're many electors just over 21 years of age, and such young peoplo were apt to w attracted to a tree pictiiro show, and to accord general favour to the candidate providing it— to regard him as n generous, 'liberal man. Especially was this likely; to happen when a' candidate gave nis entertainment . on the eve of an election. Indeed, entertainment was a more effective method of bribery in these days of adult suffrage than the, payment of money.- Mr. Myers proceeded to-argue on more detailed aspects of the ease. AVlien he was discussing tho orchestra at the meeting of October 30, Mr. Justice Chopman suggested that a "band' was «i body of musicians trained together and accustomed to play .together. A chance collection-of three or four players did not constitute a.band. He remarked: "I think it will need some stretching to bring this orchestra up to what is usually -understood by js band." Mr. Myers: Isn't that rather a question of 'degree, Tour Honour P Mr. Justice Chapman: I think not, because, you,may go down the |,radcs to dissolution; : . Mr. Myers: "But what *is a band for Stratford.might not be a bond.for London." Counsel urged that petitioners wero entitled to succeed because of oertain practices of Mr. Masters or his agents os being corrupt practices, or, in tho alternative, as being illegal practices. The Court nd-ioumed. till 3 p.m. tomorrow, when judgment will bg delivered.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/DOM19200318.2.84

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Dominion, Volume 13, Issue 148, 18 March 1920, Page 8

Word count
Tapeke kupu
3,478

THE STRATFORD SEAT Dominion, Volume 13, Issue 148, 18 March 1920, Page 8

THE STRATFORD SEAT Dominion, Volume 13, Issue 148, 18 March 1920, Page 8

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert