The Election Petition.

Feilding Star, Volume XV, Issue 246, 22 February 1894, Page 2

The Election Petition.

THE PETITION QUASHED. (per puess association.") Wellington, February 21. Argument in the Stout election petition case was resumed this morning by Mr Jellicoe. who contended with reference to the third ground of. the motion that the Court had no power to enlarge the time for the publication of the petition. Mr Edwards, for the petiitoner Eobelt, nrgned it was not necessary that the petition should be served on the Returning Officer personally, and contended the petitioner should not have to sutler because of the Returning Officer's absence. This was the case for the petitioners. Without culling on Mr Jellicoe to repty, the Chief Justice said the case might be disposed of on the ground that there had not been that delivery to the Returning Officer which the Legislature had immediately required. Then as to the sec ond delivery on the last day — namely, posting of document — he thought that was not a oufficient delivery within the meaning of the Act. The document remained in the letter-box, and was not taken out by anyone on the 291h, so it was not re ceived within the stipulated time by anj person on the Returning Officer's behalf. In Hia Honor's opinion the posting of the petition, in a pnvute letter-box was nob a sufficient delivery. Therefore, for the reasons stated, he thought there had not been a delivery of the petition within the meaning of the Act. Mr Justice Richmond said he concurred in what had fallen from the Chief Justice. Mr Jellicoe then asked that the motion be taken off the Supreme Court file and costs be fixed. Mr Edwards submitted this was not a case for costs. Respondent had suffered no wrong, and besides it was a fresh point upon s. fresh statute. The Chief Justice agreed it was not a case for costs. Mr Jellicoe asked their Honors to re sume sitting as the Election Petition Court, and as such to dismiss the petition. The Chief Justice said the petition must be dismissed. Mr Jellicoe asked the Court to make an order against the petitioners for general costs of the petition. Mr Edwards pointed out there was now no petition before the Court. The Chief Justice remarked to Mr Jel licoe that if he wanted costs he should not have taken the preliminary objection. He thought the Court bad no juvisdiction to grant costs. Eventually argument on the question of costs in the Election PeU« lion Court was adjourned until Saturday morning.