The Guardian And Evening Star, with which is incorporated the West Coast Times. FRIDAY. MARCH 12, 1926. ELECTION VAGARIES.

Hokitika Guardian, 12 March 1926, Page 2

The Guardian And Evening Star, with which is incorporated the West Coast Times. FRIDAY. MARCH 12, 1926. ELECTION VAGARIES.

Tub I '(Jrt’y River Argils” yomeuiiat disgruntled over the outcome of the late, election petition. As the champion of the petitioner this is perhaps not surprising- The newspaper suggests .something about- the vagaries of the election, hut one of the most striking .phases of the recent enquiry was the disposition of the petitioner to prove the case for the respondent. It would appear as it the petitioner set out to prove over much, with tho result that some of it rebounded to his own disadvantage As to the vagaries of an election, they are self-apparent. There are mi many pitfalls ut all stages that irregularities of one kind and another creep in. Even in the simple matter of enrolment, tho trouble begins Several voters were disfranchised in some cases for what were evidently honest mistakes, then, in connection with the absent voters there was room for many irregularities. The method of taking the absent votes on this occasion was a new one, and the average elector was slow to pick up some of the rules governing the matter. The proof oi identity is certainly ol the greatest, moment in regard to absent voters, and naturally there, must he a rigid rule. Then in regard to tho actual voting, the dual systems as between local elections and general elections are in the minds of many pooplo. and tho unwary or careless, or even over careful, desire to record their vote in such a way that it will ho beyond doubt. Some folk therefore combine the two systems. The “cross” method of voting has cropped up in the Westland election, and the Court ruled with tho Returning Officer in allowing such votes. In the Lyttelton election tho “cross’’ votes wore disallowed by tbo Magistrate at the recount. As the Judges to preside at the Lyttelton enquiry to-day will he the same as in tho Westland enquiry, the votps with a. “cross” must crop up again, and the ruling in tho Westland case will no doubt stand. Here then, is a striking example of the vagaries of an election. showing how on points of great importance, as well as in minor detail.'*, opiniiwis differ. With an instance such as this in mind, our Greymouth contemporary will.'"find some coin solution after all. Judges, like doctors, do not always agree, anti tho laymen who attempt to build tip a case oil their own interpretation of the law are apt to find themselves bad clients in the end, for the law is likefy to be read, differently by different

minds. On this aspect-, too, there was the instaucb in the late Westland enquiry where counsel for the petitioner relied on an English case for .support of his contention. This was rebutted by the learned counsel on the other side who was able to quote a New Zealand case liefore a responsible Court, which swayed this Election Court favorably on an important point. The only escape from troubles such as arose in both the Westland and Lyttelton elections, is the obvious one, to secure as great a margin as possible to claim an assured victory. It has been evident over and over again where close elections are contested, irregularities can bo unearthed to affect a small percentage of the the votes. In the Westland instance the sifting of the facts brought to light was in favor of the candidate 1 declared dulv elected on the casting vote of the Returning Officer. In tho . Lyttelton ea.se it is too soon to specu- | late, but there as here, the course of | justioe will run its way, and a judg- , ment will be given in keeping with , the facts and the interpretation of the j

law by the Court constituted for the purpose.