The Recent County Elections

Kawhia Settler and Raglan Advertiser, Volume IV, Issue 390, 4 December 1908, Page 2

The Recent County Elections

DECLARED INVALID. It has b->en known for some time past that a petition had baen lodged to nullify the Kawhia County elec‘ion. The inquiry waa held by Mr E. C. Cutten, &.M., Mr Swarbrick appearing frtr the applicants and Mr Gil.ies fur the councillors. In opening the case Mr Swarbriok said that the grinds of the petition were—That no returning officer was ever appointed, therefore the whole election was void ; that there was no proper roll prepared ; that there was no place for receiving nominations advertised. In regard to the Waiharakeke Riding the petitioners maintained that the npminatiion of Shaw was no proper and should have not been accepted ; that Hay I ?ck’s nomination wa? improperly rejected; that Hay lock should ba elected on the grounds that he was the only candidate duly nominated. Hu argued that these grounds if proved were sufficient to void ihe election,;

The first witness called was Charles Francis Eyles Burton, Kawhia County Clerk. He produced the minute book and read a minute of November 25tb, “ That the action of the chairman in appointing Mr Barton returning officer be approved of.” He waa appointed by the chairman verbally, He also produced the roll, but no correction fahad been initialed by the Magistrate. It was made out in April, 1908, in ao cord an ce with the Act. It was advertised as open for inspection, but es there were no objections it waa not pm before the Magistrate. The defaulters who had paid their rates up to 80 b of June were added, about half-a dozen The writing over the alterations was made when be found that by bad n>> power to alter it, but subsequent to th 80th of June. Every name was al tered back again, and at tbe time of the election tbe rolls used were *>x«C'ly as they were on June 30:h. He also produced notices of the election and the nominations received. Shaw’s first nomination was rejected, owing to one who signed it not being qualified to do so. Another paper was received which was accepted.

Mr Gillies: That clears up that p int. Continuing, witness said that both ratepayers and Haylock who signed HayL ok’s nnmiriarion paper were qualified. He received tbe nomination at the Post Office at 12.20 p.m. on November stb. He declared tbe poll at noon and at the time stated he was informed there was a registered letter for him and ba then went and got it. The letter was not sent to him, neither was notice of a registered letter put in tbe County’s box. At 12 20 p.m. the messenger was Heat to tell him of tbe registered letter. To Mr Gillies—Tbe minute when he was appointed to his present position read: “ That the chairman’s action in appointing Mr Barton clerk and wharfinger at a salary of £165 per annum be approved.” The,clerk was invariably returning officer, and he had never known anyone else act in that capacity. When the minute was written Mr Newton was clerk. Tbe irregularity was discovered by the chairman, who told witness to ac% Mr Shuw swearing him in. The only irregularity was that there was no min ute. He made a completed roll on or before ‘June 30th, and subsequently made certain alterations on the opinion of Mr Martin, Counties* Association solicitor. He found that he bad made an error, and put the roll back to exactly the same state as it was on June 80th, upon which the election took place. The tampering waa altering the roll in error and altering it back again. The first nomination of Shaw was signed by D. Tynan, whom, he discovered had no right to be on the roll.

Mr Gillies: There is something here about Kearns’ nomination. Mr Swarbrick : That is not to be gone on with. Mr Gillies : Now, about Hay lock’s nomination. Ido not want to waste time, but there are allegations in the petition that witness knew it was there. Disinbrreatel persons might think terrible things, and I wish to clear Mr Barton’s character. It is a most extraordinary petition, and there are dreadful ooousationa against the clerk and chairman.

Mr Swarbriok (who had been pre viously accused by Mr Gillies of want ing time) : Who is wasting time now?

Mr Gillies: The late Mr Seddon once said that if you give a lie 24 hours’ start you can never overtake 1 This Las had a fortnight’s. Mr Swarbriok ; Give you a start and you’ll talk for 24 hours Mr Gillies : I wish I o >uld I would be worth more money then. Witness (continuing) said that he went to the post office two or three times that morning, and on tbe last occasion asked to postmistress to look round, but was informed that there were no letters there. The notice be hid used was the same used by the Raglan and Waipa Counties. He could not think tbit there was any other place to receive nominations but Ka whia.

Charles Haylock recognised the signatures oc the nomination paper. H< had every reason to believe be would have biwrt elected on the occasion had he gone to the poll. The reason he sent the nomination by registered letter was because it would bo a sure way oi getting delivery and the letter would be traceable. He saw tbe notice calling for nominations and believed he bad complied with it. If any rlace had been mentioned he would have seen that the nomination was delivered there.

To Mr G Hies—The envelope was addressed by Mr H. Darecour. and he was quite prepared to stand or falf by him. He worried that the e was no place mentioned where nomiaations wee* to be snat to, aad alter can yew*-'

Hon with Derecoart it was decided to register it and post it to Kawhia. Tfce election was materially eff-cted by the place not being mentioned, as it »t had been his nomination would have been delivered there. He did not doubt either Barton or Shaw, and bad no suspicion of dirty work in tbe matter. He dissociated himself with the portion of ihe petition that said B*rton know his netuinaiion was lying at the post office. He did not read the manuscript portion of the petition (refer ring to Kearns’ nomination), which he signed at place. Catherine Amelda Coady, pootmietteaa at Kawhia, said that the registered letter arrived from K’n >haka on Wednesday 4'h, and Mr Barton got it shortly after noon on the sb. It was an oversight of <he assistaut’a in not putting the usual advice card in the box, she being engaged in other w.rk

Harry Darecourt said th»t he registered 'he letter bee ,use the notice said “ addressed to reach,” ba': if any pUce : had been staled he would haye addressed it to that place. By Mr Gillies—He may have delivered the letter, or per taps paid a special to do so, but woaid not hivregistered it had the no ice beu worded differently. He e.ideav >ur> d to comply with the notice. He -id dreased the letter to ihe (Luu y offi as be took it that that whs ihe «igr»' place to fiddr it to. To the S.M —Thd f ct hat T’outt'y ffi-e •- i»« m Hi-.- -d not eff.-o • »•' e r •. . i, did not de . • lie •hb m coon* of H i I’h dir wna d uo' ti r it ■ d f H ver isem-m « Conn <y Offi -*■. K -1 not have t oue x layering i Tbt- c >uu u d e. . .»• -i itiunera, *n«t M? Gi -les c ed William Jo-bo • r>ha h-> that be bad be.-u Chnrin<u of b<- K a hit* Couuty Couuci* between two u, . ’hree years and waa chwiiman whin Barton was appointed clerk and re earning officer was meant to be included. He bad never heard of hi y one acting as re arniog office excep * ing the clerk. He- verbally instructed Barton to act as that was toe wish of the Council. Mr Gillies addressed the C art arguing that the issues brought forward were quite immaterial. Anyone reading the petition, be said, would think terrible tilings, but upon examination they were mere technicalities, and the accusations against Mr Barton were not substantiated. Ma Swarbrick said that Mr Barton had been in his office and he knew him as an honourable gentleman. The pe'ition was drawn up on legal ground, and there was not the slightest imputation against Mr Barton of there being anything wrong; be had acted with the beat intentions but in an irregalar manner, hence the petition.

In giving his decision Mr Cutten said that tbe case had some importantpoints, and the tronbie seemed to have arisen in the Waiharakeke Riding, where owing to a mistake in tbe post office one nomination was not delivered m time. It was a pity that that had cccnrred and it would have beeu sio-pler if Mr Shaw had resigned and fought the election with Mr Haylook. The question was not whether tbe election in that riding shonld be upset but that of the whole Council. There were three points, auy one of which would void the elec'ion. The question oil the rolls had not been pressed,, bat it did not appear to him as if any injastice or unfairness had been occasioned thereby. The notice, no doubt, should have contained qoi e clearly tba place where the nomma tions were to be delivered ; but tn a sense it did contain the necessary information. He did not consider that tbe notice was so very bad as to be io itself sufficient to upset the elect ion, an there was no evidence to-how that it led or was likely t» leid to a nomin « ion not being received. He was aa»i-fi.-d that the non receip- <»f H .yi >r-k’s n • minatiun was not due to nut defec in the notice, i’h 1) reo-»art hid said th •• .f • •’ c- h d hw»n Slated that it * I »' » h•• eff C -d tbe way he p —. B ; raigh »ou» ht. , qa-atioij it • . , , e io reach tin retor ti « i - a

good noiic--. oa it »• j u - i him ’hoy 0.. k -nt- •• k Th - Honan* ti-»n ought s.j nave r- « ■ -i him, bat. h mis!aka-ill the p•- -tfi had a reauft ou ihe election, ><qi her» f.ire c»n'd not be attriba cd to he r.-tn-orng ffi cer. The uex< omn wst that the reluming officer had not be>*u nppuia><-d and vias only act ng as a private individual. It did not effect rhe fairness uf the election, bat be afraid he would have to uphold the point., H-» was in rry to have to do ao, aw it was a phy to apser tbe e action wimply on account of rha’ mis «ke. Tbe appointment of tbe retarding officer was required by the Local Elections Act. arid no did not think that Mr Barton had any jurisdiction. Mr Barton whs appointed by the chairman, the action by a minute of the Council on Novem ber 25th. A local body coaid only express an opinion in tbe mio ate book, therefore it mast be referred to an lo ratifying (he chair mm’s notion. This was confirmsd after the election was over and by a Council that was elected at that election. If the resolution was not passed tbe Council would he illegally elected. Ho mast conclude that the resolution coaid not be passed vn the 25th of November, and a so that Mr Barton was not returning officer. In his opinion it was a po ; n' beyond a mere irregularity, and thcugh he did not think it would alter ihe elec’ious held he must uphold i(. He uvheld th* petition and declared the ehetion not regular.

Legal asgument then ensued as to coats, Mr Cutten replying that al though his sympathies were with re spondents they would hive to t»y n Hoiicitor's fee of £5 5a and •'! ceari costs.