THE Marlborough Express. SATURDAY, DECEMBER 11, 1869.

Marlborough Express, Volume IV, Issue 207, 11 December 1869, Page 3

THE Marlborough Express.

SATURDAY, DECEMBER 11, 1869.

•• GIVR me the liberty to know, to utter, and to ergue freely according to conscience, above all other liberties.* Milton.

The recent Election for the Pelorus is, as we anticipated some weeks ago, to be disputed in the Supreme Court, Mr. Douslin having been cited to appear before Blr. Justice Richmond, at Nelson, on Friday next, to show cause why a warrant should not be issued compelling him to show by what authority he claims to be a member of the Provincial Council. The proceedings are taken ostensibly at the instance ot Mr. Joshua Rutland, one of the defeated candidates, who has, it would seem, some loose cash to spare, a fondness for judicial proceedings undeterred by the proverbial uncertainties of the law, and a strong desire for a seat in the Council ; and from what we know of the circumstances, we surmise that he will have an opportunity of gratifying his taste for law at his own expense to a sufficient extent to last him until—he does get a seat among his wiser and more experienced superiors in the Provincial Council. The following is a copy of the document alluded to :

“ In the Supreme Court of New Zealand, Nelson District, on Friday, the third day of December, 1869. “ Rutland v. Douslin. —Upon reading the affidavits of John Wilson and Joshua Rutland, sworn and filed herein, and the paper writing thereto annexed, and upon hearing Mr. Conolly, of Counsel for the said Joshua Rutland, it is ordered that William Douslin, of Havelock, in the Province of Marlborough, within this District, Esquire, do, on the seventeenth day of December, instant, (provided that a copy of this Rule shall have been served upon him seven clear days previously), show cause before Christopher William Richmond, Esquire, a Judge of the Supreme Court of New Zealand, at the Court-house, at the City of Nelson, in the Province of Nelson, within this District, at ten of the clock in the forenoon, why an information in the nature of a writ of Quo Warranto should not be exhibited against him, to show by what authority he the said William Douslin claims to be a member of the Provincial Council of the Province of Marlborough, on the ground that the election of the said William Douslin was decided by only one vote above any other candidate, and that three of the votes given for the said William Douslin were the votes of George Gwillim, George Smith, and Richard Hutchinson, being persons respectively under the age of twenty-one years ; and also to show cause why the said William Douslin should not pay the costs of these proceedings. “ By the Court, (1.5.) “Charles L. Maclean, Registrar.” Last week we penned some remarks upon the election, and its results, which we were unable to find room for at the time ; and

it is as well now that we did not insert them, inasmuch as we might thereby damage Mr. Douslin’s interests by exposing what might be his defence in these factious proceedings, therefore we shall refrain from noticing more than the extraordinary protest which, with some remarks calculated to create a wrong impression, was published by our Picton contemporary on the 2-lth ulc. The Pelorus election took place on November 11th, when the Returning Officer conducted the proceedings, so far as the Miners were concerned, under the Miners’ Representation Act, 1862, by which a number of them were prevented from voting. Notwithstanding this extraordinary proceeding, the result was that Messrs. Douslin and Levien were declared by the Returning Officer duly elected. On the 13th November, two days after the polling, the following protest was sent to, and improperly received by him :

“Havelock, Nov. 13, 1869. “ We, the undersigned, electors and candidates for the representation of the Pelorus district in the Provincial Council of Marlborough, do hereby protest against the return of G. E. Levien and William Douslin as representatives for the district on the ground that five of the votes recorded for them were given by persons disqualified to vote, the following being the particulars of our objections : ‘ George Gwillim, Richard Hutchinson, and George Smith voted, being under the age of twenty-one years. " Chailes Newmaister voted, being an alien. “Charles Morgan voted, being disqualified by his miner’s right not being dated six months before the Ist of October last, as by law required. “ And we protest against the Returning Officer at Deep Creek receiving the votes of the said Charles Morgan and Charles Newmaister, he having thereby exceeded his duty. “(Signed Joshua Rutland, Pelorus Valley. Duncan Parker, Pelorus Sound.” The last sentence is rather rich, as the writers protest against the officer receiving the votes of Morgan and Newmaister, two days after lie had done so, on the ground that he had thereby exceeded his duty. The officer had every right to receive the votes, Morgan holding a Miner’s Right over six months old, and Newmaister being a naturalised British subject—but the protestors evidently forgot that no less than three aliens voted for Rutland and Parker. Our contemporary in commenting on the protest, endeavored to show by lengthy extracts from a repealed Act that it was correct, as well as the conduct of the election, whereas it now appears that the whole series of troubles and annoyances has resulted from the culpable ignorance—to call it no worse—of the Returning Officer, who ignored the Miners’ Representation Act, 1863, and thereby excluded no less than seventeen voters from exercising their franchise on the occasion, who were entitled under the following clause : “Every man of the age of 21 or upwards not being disqualified under Section 8 of the Constitution Act, and being the lawful holder of a Miner’s Right orofa Bus ness License ..who shall have held such Right or License respectively for not less than six months consecutively and immediately preceeding the day of the election at which he desires to vote, shall be entitled to vote at every such election of Gold-fields members of the House of Representatives and of Goldfields Members of the Provincial Council”...

The election only requires the dictum of the Judge to quash it on the ground of illegality. The Returning Officer declared Mr. DousUn elected, and three weeks afterwards, just at the time the Council is to meet, he is attacked by his defeated opponent, who seeks by upsetting him to cover the improprieties in the conduct of the election, and be elected by the Judge in lieu of the people who rejected him. It is to be hoped however, now that the machinery of the law has been set in motion, that the whole matter will be thoroughly sifted to the bottom, whatever may be the ultimate consequences to the individuals who have thus set at defiance all law and decency, and that they may be taught that it cannot now-a-dajs be done with impunity.