HUTT GASWORKS
VALIDITY OF LOAN-POLL QUESTIONED REPORT BY RETURNING OFFICER The Lower Hutt Ratepayers’ Proteotion Association is at present investigating the legality of the loan poll on the question of gasworks (held on June 29 last), on tho ground that it is alleged that ratepayers’ wiveg had so qualihca.'tions to exercise their votes, and also that joint owners of property were not each allowed a, vote. At the request of the Alayor of Lower Hutt (Mr. E. I. Rishworth), the returning officer, Mr. J. F. Evans, has prepared the following report regarding the allegations as to tho validity of the poll: — “In view of the opinion having been recently given that only ratepayers whose qualifications to vote is their own right, are entitled to vote on a proposal to raise a loan, I beg to submit the following information in' connection with the gasworks loaai poll held on June 29 last. ' ’ “Prior to the roll being closed, the borough solicitor gave it as opinion that ratepayers and their wives, or husbands, as the case might be, were entitled. to vote. The total number who voted, whether in their own right or not, was 764, being 555 for and 198 •against, and 11 were informal. Out ot '.thia number there were 182 who voted in the right of husband or .wife. “Allowing for the remote possibility that all these persons voted for the proposal and none against, it could mean that the result would be 555 for, less the 182, leaving 873 for and 198 againstIn other words, if only those votes were counted where people voted in their own right it would still mean a majority in favour of at least 175 votes, or practically two to one in favour. I would particularly emphasise the fact that all tho votes over which there might lie any doubt- have been deducted from the number in favour, of the proposal, whereas it would be an equitable proposition to take a proportionate number of the 198. “On account of the above fact I do not consider that any good purpose could bo served by having a further legal opinion on the matter, more especially as any objection .to the procedure of a poll has to be made within fourteen days of the gazetting of the result.—(Signed) J. F. Eames, Returning Officer.-” . Apropos of the association’s request that the Mayor and those councillors in favour of tho erection of the gasworks should resign, Mr. Rishworlji told a Dominion reporter last evening that lie had been informed (by a member of ths association) that at the meeting on Tuesday night, when the resolution was passed there were only about eight members present. “The fact that, tho association’s meetings are not open to the Press,”-said Mr. liishworth, and that the association has not been constituted in the ordinary way—by public meeting —makes their request for the resignations of tho Mayor and councillors of very little importance. Regarding the reebnt petition presented to the council, .’the signatures included tho names of ratepayers’ wives, and if these signatures were deleted, the list course, be considerably reduced. Ino petition itself docs not represent 50 per cent, of the ratepayers, and I might add that the actual electors of the borough are not only the ratepayers. Tire franchise of electing the Mayor and councillore is much wider than that of a ratepayers’ roll.**
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/DOM19211112.2.8
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
Dominion, Volume 15, Issue 42, 12 November 1921, Page 2
Word count
Tapeke kupu
563HUTT GASWORKS Dominion, Volume 15, Issue 42, 12 November 1921, Page 2
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
Stuff Ltd is the copyright owner for the Dominion. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International licence (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Stuff Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.