LYTTELTON SEAT

Hokitika Guardian, 4 December 1925, Page 1

LYTTELTON SEAT

AIR McCOMBS -MAY PETITION. j „y TELEGRAPH —PER PRESS ASSOCIATION.] CHE ISTCHURCH, December 3. Regarding the Lyttelton electoral recount, -Mr Jus. McCombs was asked whether he intended to proceed with a petition to an Election Court. M.r McCombs replied that he had yet to consult his solicitor in connection with the matter. In view of the fact tnat certain evidence was only admissible before an Election Court, it was probable that as in the case of the Westland seat a petition would he .lodged. It is interesting to note that there is one. more vote than was shown in the figures issued by Lyttelton Returning Officer. Not counting the Returning Officer’s vote, which was east in favour of Afv Lyons, the number of votes for him, on the Magisterial recount, have decreased by ten as compared with the Returning Officer’s count, and those for Mr McCombs have decreased by 16. This is a. total decrease of 26. The informal votes have, however, increased by 27.

It is stated that the recount by the Magistrate has disclosed several interesting features. The arithmetic of the official count was not confirmed. Votes were allowed, and others were disallowed by the Returning Officer. Ballot papers that wore marked with a cross opposite the name of the candidate were not allowed. It was ruled that, on a Afagisterial recount, evidence could not he taken regarding the status of people resident in "Ellesmere and the Christchurch East at the time of enrolment and at the time of voting in the Lyttelton electorate. It was stated that this was n matter that eould go to an Election Court if a petition were presented. The question of electors being refused the right to vote at booths outside the Lyttelton electorate because the deputy returning officers had run out of absent voters permits was also ruled out, as lieing outside the scope of the recount.