THE MAYORALTY

Dominion, Volume 14, Issue 150, 21 March 1921, Page 4

THE MAYORALTY

CUTTING DOWN THE NUMBER OF CANDIDATES SUGGESTION FROM MR. NORWOOD The names of six likely candidates for ihe Mayoralty of Wellington, an issue to lie decided on April 27, are at present before the electors. Labour nominated Mr. P. Hickey as its candidate, since when the names of Messrs. L. M'Kenzie, R. A. Wright, M.P., C. B. Norwood. T. W. Hislop, and T. S. Weston have been put forward. The name of Mr. Weston, it seems, was somewhat prematurely announced by ‘he Greater Wellington Municipal Electors’ Committee, as his consent to do so was given subject to certain conditions, one being that the number of candidates should be reduced, as it was not at all his intention to further complicate the issue by adding another name to an already large list. To bring the candidates to some agreement, which would leave the contest a straight-out one between the Labour candidates and the nominee of the citizens generally, several bodies have lieen active. So far these bodies have not been successful in bringing about the desired understanding, so that it has been for the candidates themselves to make some sort of rapprochement in order to narrow down the field. To facilitate matters, Mr. C. B. Norwood, with the consent of his committee, has put forward a proposal, which is embodied in a letter handed to The Dominion by Mr. W. E. Jackson (chairman of Mr. Norwood’s committee). The letter, copies of which have been sent to Messrs. Hislop, M'Kenzie, and Wright, reads as follows:— <c After several conversations wit 11. tho other candidates relative to the position that has arisen as the result of the large number of candidates in the field, thus endangering the interests of the city by the possible return of a Labour candidate. I have come to the conclusion that I will invite the other candidates to take part in a ballot among themselves on the preferential system, by which three of their number would be eliminated. "There are various suggestions to put names before public bodies with this object in view, but it seems to the writer a more dignified method would be to mutually upon some arrangement in the form of, say, preferential voting between ourselves to clear this matter up and allow the field to lie cleared as between the Labour and the general ratepayers’candidate. •‘Your past services to the public prompt me to make this suggestion, believing that you will feel that rome rendition must, lie found that will bring about the desired result in the interests of the public, and T trust on tins account voir will not think the suggestion is presumptuous on my part—Yours very truly, C. B. Norwood.” At. least one of the candidates—Mr. Wrivht—has agreed to the proposal, and answers may Fo expected from the other two to-day. Under the proposal, at the first ballot, every candidate would naturally plaea No. 1 against his own name, hut the test of the united feeling of all four would be the placing of the other throe on their list in order to bring about (he elimination of the candidate who registers the lowest votes. Two other ballots would then be taken to determine tho successful candidate. The only thing likely to mar the scheme would be the entry into the field, before, or on the day nominations close, of another lot of candidates, which might leave the situation just as complicated as it is to-day. Suggestion is made, therefore, tiiat it might lie wise to postpone the eliminating ballots-if 'the scheme be approved by all four candidates-unfnl a date near the closing of nominations.