Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

INTELLIGENT ELECTORS.

Commenting on the recent Election (Court in the Bay of Islands case, the Wellington Post says: "The offi(cial declaration gave the decision to Mr. Bell on the return--ing officer’s easting vote; but a , Magisterial recount reversed this, and Mr. Rushwbrth wus declared elected. Now the Election Court has disallowed some votes given to Air. Rushwort'h and allowed some which were withheld from Mr. Bell. The effect of the Court’s decision is that Mr. Rushworth! has not been duly returned, and a fresh election will therefore be necessary. This must be more satisfactory to the parties than a decision on odd votes. The judgment reveals, however, the weakness of our electoral system, and how unsubstantial the fabric of our boasted majority rule may be. If either Air. Rushworth or Mr. Bell had definitely won the seat it would have been by the votes of electors who showed themselves incapable of following the simple voting rules. It is amazing that there should be this difficulty in a country which boasts of its education. It gives rise to the question: Have we gone too far in granting the franchise? An intelligence test that would satisfy all political parties would be difficult to deyise. Each party would claim, no doubt, that the election itself was a sufficient test —all the intelligent being its own supporters, and the unintelligent voting with the other parties. But it may be quite seriously advanced that the correct observance of voting rules should be required as a proof of capacity to vote. Where an elector carries out this simple task so faultily that a returning officer, a Magistrate, and two Supreme Court Judges cannot agree upon the) meaning 'of the vote, there is surely sufleient ground for rejecting the vote altogether. This may be done not only because of the uncertainty, but because a voter so befogged by a simple process is not one whose judgment on the .merits of candidates or parties is worth the ballot paper he has spoilt.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/MH19290131.2.29

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Manawatu Herald, Volume L, Issue 3901, 31 January 1929, Page 3

Word count
Tapeke kupu
334

INTELLIGENT ELECTORS. Manawatu Herald, Volume L, Issue 3901, 31 January 1929, Page 3

INTELLIGENT ELECTORS. Manawatu Herald, Volume L, Issue 3901, 31 January 1929, Page 3

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert