LYTTELTON ELECTION PETITION.

Hokitika Guardian, 16 March 1926, Page 1

LYTTELTON ELECTION PETITION.

CHRISTCHURCH, March 15. The judgment of the Court in the Lyttelton election petition was as follows THE JUDGMENT. Mr Justice Stringer said:— “ In this ease, the Court lias acted upon the principles already laid down in the Westland case in deciding the questions of fact raised by the evidence as to whether certain votes could lie validly objected to, on the ground that the voters had been illegally placed and retained on the roll. Nine cases of this kind alleged by the petitioner were admitted by counsel for respondent, and these votes have been rejected. Six cases of this kind the petitioner essayed to prove. With regard to two of tlio.se, Archibald William MacPlmil and his wife, it was admitted that the proof had tailed. With regard to four. Rena Winifred Adamson. .Muriel Isabel Wiggins, Leslie Tracey Kivor Allison, and his wife, in the opinion of the Court the proof was sufficient and these votes have been rejected. Wo think the ease of Miss Adamson is distinguishable from that of a. medical student, inasmuch as a probationer nurse is required to enter into a written com tract of service and residence at the hospital, so that tier principal place of residence is where she has contracted to work and reside.

“The respondent filed objections to the qualifications of fourteen voters, but no evidence was offered with regard to nine of them, and the want of qualification of the remaining five was admitted by the petitioner. The total number of those who were proved or omitted to lack the necessary qualification was, therefore, eighteen. We have carefully examined the voting papers of these disqualified persons and have deducted their votes in whose favour they were respectively cast. “ We have also examined the votes recorded by a cross, and which, for reasons given in the Westland case, wo think were wrongly rejected and have allowed them to the candidates foe whom they were intended. The result of these adjustments is that it is not necessary to hear evidence as to the alleged disqualification of Cyril Edward Booth, for which purpose we had reserved leave to the ]>etitioiior. “ We also find it unnecessary to deal with the three votes referred lo in paragraph I of the petitioner’s particulars. Even if those were declared valid they would not affect the result. With regard to Hie three votes mentioned in paragraph 5 of the same particulars, which wo presume refer to the three papers on which the names of the electors were written, we think these wore J invalid and wore rightfully rejected, j "With regard to the two votes men-, ioned in paragraph 7 of the portion-!

lars. after comparing the signatures on the applications to vote with those on the eimilmoni cards, we think the Returning Officer and the Magistrate were light in rejecting both these votes, and we see no reason to overrule their decision. It was, jn our opinion, impossible to identity either of those votes, and we see no reason to overrule (heir decision. II was, in our opinion, impossible to identify either of these votes by comparison of the

signatures. “The final result is as follows: JAMES At'COAI BS. total number of valid votes 1900 AfELVI LLE EDWIN LYONS total number of valid voles -1359 .Majority for M'Combs 11 "We therefore determine that James M'Combs has been duly elected for the electoral district of Lyttelton and shall mi certify to the Speaker of tho House of Representatives. " The respondent must pay the petitioner’s cost, and we lix them on the Supreme Court scale as on a claim of CSOI. We also allow witnesses’ expenses, limited to those eases in which lie was suecesfnl. and to he fixed by the Registrar. We also certify for second counsel and we allow a foe ot C 7 7s. Certificates of indemnity will he supplied to all witnesses applying for same.”

FICURES ANALYSED. INTERESTING POINTS. An interesting Is«<• i in connection with tfie Court’s decision is that Mr M'Cmnlis's total is the same as it was in llif Rournin.Lt Officers’ declaration after the poll, hut Mr Lyons’s total is eleven votes loss. or. including the Returning Officer's easting vote. twelve less. The figures after each declaration are as follow: OKEI'OI A L COUNT. Lyons -1000 M'Combs 1000 Informal 1M Lyons declared elected on the pasting vote of the Returning Officer. MAGISTERIAL RECOUNT. Lyons 4490 .M'Combs > 18S4 Informal 1-1 Majority for Lyons . ( > Lyons declared elected. ELECTORAL COURT'S COUNT. M’Combs 40(H) Lyons ! ,s tbo Majority lor M Combs . 11

The number of informal votes is not stated by the Electoral Court, but on the figures of the Magiserial Recount, the informal votes and the votes disallowed for various reasons total 100. Interesting points in connection with the Electoral Court’s decision are:— Votes recorded by marking ballot papers with a. cross are allowed. A nurse and a teacher working and residing away from their parents’ home cannot give their addresses as those of their parents. The Returning Officer's decisions in all matters over which he had jurisdiction were confirmed. There wore no irregularities complained of in connection with the conduct of the election. The election of Mr M’Combs makes the state of the two Opposition parties in the House oven. The Nationalists, together with Sir Joseph Ward and Mr H. Atmore, number twelve, and the Labour Party muster a similar number. Air Lyons has been the lawful member for Lyttelton from the time of the Returning Officer’s declaration on November 14 until unseated by the Electoral Court, and has been paid a Parliamentary salary. Tt is not clear whether Mr M’Combs will receive back pay for tho time that Mr Lyons has bold the seat.