RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT, GREYTOWN.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXX, Issue 4346, 23 February 1875, Page 3

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT, GREYTOWN.

(Before H. S. Wardell, Esq., R.M.) The Local Board v. the following ratepayers ;—Hugh O’Connor, rates £7 12s, 2d. ; M. Hershberg, £6 19s. old.; W. Udy, £3 Bs. 4d. ; B. Gallagher, £3 Bs. 9d.; T. Walker, £3 7s. Bd.; W. Hammeuch, £3. 45.; C. Ticehurst, £1 18s.; J. Baillie, £1 11s. 7d. ; D. McPhee, £1 2s. lOd. • >'

This is the third, time that the Local Board has appeared as plaintiff iu the R.M. Court. J. Hawke, the party first summonsed, appealed to the Supreme Court, and the case is now pending before the Court of. Appeal next May. Shortly after that case was set down for the Court of Appeal, the Local Board resolved on summonsing five more ratepayers, but those cases were lost, with costs, in consequence of the collector suing in his own name only. The Board then resolved on summonsing the five again, with an addition to their number. Mr. Beard appeared for the Board, and Mr. Stedman for defendants.

Mr. Stedman requested that the evidence taken in a former case—Local Board v. Hawke, the case pending before the Court of Appeal might be taken as evidence in this case, as he had not expected the Local Board would press these cases - in the way they were doing, and he had not subpoened witnesses, who had kept put of the way. The Court was adjourned for half-an-hour to give time to Mr. Stedman to, get witnesses for the defence.

When the Court re-npened, the returning officer and poll clerk (or deputy returning officer), who were required as witnesses for the defence, were not in attendance ; but Mr. Stedman decided on proceeding with such witnesses as were at hand.. '

Thomas Frothy, sworn : : I am assessor, clerk, and collector to the Greytown Local Board. I produce minute book containing notice of ray appointment to the Board. It was my duty to assess the property within the district. I was appointed clerk to the Board, The rate was levied by the Board. The amount of defendant’s rate was £7 12s. 2d. I posted notice to the defendant on 4th September last. I attended at the place named therein to receive the rate. Defendant has not paid his rate up to the present time. Cross-examined by Mr. Stedman,; The members of the Board are those contained in the notice. I was present during part of the nomination. Mr. Tully was returning officer at the election of members of the Board. I believe the polling was on the day following the nomination. I was present at the polling as scrutineer, engaged by Mr, Tully. The Resident Magistrate remarked that scrutineers were appointed by candidates. [lt seemed to be forgotten by magistrate, lawyers, and witness, that in this case the returning officer was also a candidate, and was returned at the head of tho poll.]

Cross-examination continued ; Mr. Wakelin was acting as poll clerk. Mr. Tully was not present during the day. I was at the polling place about 9 o’clock. Tho ballot-box had not then arrived. I cannot say how long it was after I came when the ballot-box arrived. We waited for it some time. I did not see any one apply to vote before the ballot-box arrived. I do not remember that I saw that the ballotbox was empty before it was used to deposit voting papers in. The poll closed at 4 o’clock. Mr. Wakelin and myself opened the ballotbox, and counted the number of votes for each candidate, and wo then called in Mr. Tully, tho returning officer, and gave him tho numbers. Mr. Tully went outside and announced the numbers we gave him. He announced the same number of votes for Mr. Gallagher and Mr. Payton, but he did not give a casting vote ,for either of them. Re-examined by Mr. Beard : Mr. Wakelin acted under Mr. Tully at the polling. I believe I was here at 9 o’clock. The ’ announcement by Mr. Tully of the number of votes was from information supplied by Mr. Wakelin and myself, not from his own examition of the ballot-box. I was not present at tho official announcement of the result of the poll. Mr. Stedman contended that there was no Board in existence, as there was no valid election, on account of irregularities in the conduct of the election proceedings:—l. That the ballotbox ought to have been exhibited open to tho scrutineer before the election commenced, and

that the returning officer should have presided at the election. 2. That the polling should have commenced at 9 a.m. and continued till 4 p.m., and that the returning officer appointed by the Superintendent should preside at the election. 3. That the returning officer was a candidate ; and, 4, that two returns ■ were made.

Henry Byrn, sworn : I am constable at Grey town. I opened the court about lialfpast 8 a.m. on the day of the polling. I left about ten minutes past 9 o’clock in the morning. The ballot box was not there when I left. I had to go to Featherston, to be there about 10 o’clock. On my way to Featherston, at Goodens Gate, Tauberinikau, about five miles from, Greytown, I met young Hornblow carrying the ballot-box ; it was then twenty-five minutes past 9. I was told by Mr. Tally to hasten him on with it when I met him. I told him to hurry on, as they were waiting for the box at the courthouse. Hugh O’Connor, sworn : Recollected the election of members for the Local Board. Was present at both the announcement and the official declaration of the result of the poll. Recollected that there was a difference of numbers iu the two announcements. At the announcement on the close of the poll, Payton and Gallagher were even numbers ; they were 26 votes each, but at the declaration, three or four days later, they were different numbers—Mr. Gallagher was then declared to be twenty-five, and Mr. Payton twenty-six rotes. Mr. Tully was forty votes, being the highest number on the list. William Anderson, sworn: Was a storeman. Was present at the announcement of the poll by the returning officer, and had a very distinct recollection of the numbers announced by Mr. Tully, as they were subsequently impressed on his memory by alterations made in them. He recollected that Mr. Thomas Kempton, sen., was announced to have polled 29 votes, Mr. Hastwell 28, Mr. Payton 26, and Mr. Gallagher 26. That was on Tuesday evening, between four and five o’clock near five o’clock. On the following Saturday wont to the courthouse a little before noon, to hear the official declaration of the poll, and saw a written notice affixed to the courthouse door, showing the numbers to he then—for Mr. Kempton, 26 ; Mr. Hastwell, 26; Mr. Payton, 26 ; and Mr. Gallagher, 25. It was an official notice, signed by Mr. Tully, as returning officer.

By the Magistrate : There were three 26’s ; Kempton, Hastwell, and Payton, and Gallagher 25. He saw these numbers, with others, affixed, a little before noon on the Saturday following the election. Mr. Stedman, in addressing the Court, characterised the conduct of the Board as tyrannical and persecuting, when there was a case pending in the Court of Appeal, and when they knew that until that case was decided the Supreme Court, on application being made, would stay execution of any judgment of that Court, and the Board expended the ratepayers’ money to gratify their feelings in dragging the ratepayers from their business to waste their time in defending themselves against a number of gentlemen that designated themselves a Local Board a Board ■ supposed to be constituted to promote the interests of the ratepayers, instead of exercising their powers for their annoyance. The objection of the ratepayers to the Board was not a personal one, but that they were not legally constituted, and the ratepayers were persecuted by the Board for endeavoring to have the question tested by a case now pending appeal ; and the matter ought to bo allowed to rest until that case was decided.

Mr. Beard, in addressing the Court in reply said that the resistance of the ratepayers to the Board, and the non-payment of the rates, prevented it from carrying out public works that are much required in the township, and demanded judgment with costs. The Magistrate gave judgment for plaintiff, with costs, execution to be stayed for a fortnight for those who had not given notice of appeal. Mr. Thomas Walker appeals to the Supreme Court against the judgment.