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

CHARGE AGAINST THE HON. C. J. PHARAZYN.

[PBBBB ASSOCIATION TBLBOEAM.] WELLINGTON, January 5. At the Supreme Court to-day the Hon. Charles Johnston Pharazyn was indicted on a charge of personating at the general election for Thorndon by applying for a second voting paper in his own name. Defendant, who pleaded “Not guilty,” was undefended. Mr Gordon Allan appeared to prosecute. The evidence for the prosecution showed that Mr Pharazyn, after having voted at one booth, applied at the second for a voting paper, which was supplied to him, and having filled it up ha deposited it in the ballot box. In defence Mr Pharazyn explained that his voting at the second booth was a mistake. He entered the booth for the purpose of voting for Mr Johnston, a candidate for Te Aro electorate, and on reoriving the voting paper he struck out the name which was not Mr Johnston’s, and left under the impression that he had voted for that gentleman. As soon as he found out his mistake he did his beat to remedy it. His Honor summed up briefly. He said that if the jury came to the conclusion that defendant had committed an aot which the Legislature specified as an offence, it wag their duty to convict him. It was quite possible for them, however to return a special verdict should they consider circumstances justified such a proceeding. After a quarter of an hour’s deliberation the jury returned with the following verdict:—“The jury find that Mr Pharazyn having voted once at the election for Thorndon, did apply at the same election for a Toting paper in his own name, but so applied under the impression that he was voting at a different electorate for another candidate, and believe that the mistake was honestly made.” Mr Pharazyn contended that the verdict amounted to one of not gnilty. The Chief Justice and counsel for the prosecution thought differently, and eventually the question was reserved for the Appeal Court, Mr Pharazyn being admitted to bail on entering into his own recognizance of £SO to appear for judgment when called upon. Great interest was manifested in the case.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/GLOBE18820106.2.16

Bibliographic details

Globe, Volume XXIV, Issue 2419, 6 January 1882, Page 3

Word Count
357

CHARGE AGAINST THE HON. C. J. PHARAZYN. Globe, Volume XXIV, Issue 2419, 6 January 1882, Page 3

CHARGE AGAINST THE HON. C. J. PHARAZYN. Globe, Volume XXIV, Issue 2419, 6 January 1882, Page 3

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