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

SUPREME COURT AUCKLAND.

APPEAL AGAINST VALIDITY OE ELECTION TO PROVINCIAL COUNCIL. This was an application for a rule nisi calling upon Joseph Crispe to show cause why he claims to hold the position and exercise the rights of a Provincial Councillor for the province of Auck land. Mr. Gillies appeared for the appellants, and stated the circumstances of the case. From the learned counsel’s statement it appeared that at the late Provincial election defendant and Benjamin Harris were candidates for the representation of Rama Rama, in the electoral district of Franklin, and at the election defendant was returned by a majority of 8 votes. Mr. Gillies said the motion was made under the Provincial Elections Act of 1858, section 9, which being one of the sections of that Act not'repealed by the Regulation of Elections Act, 1870 laid it down that the Electoral Roll for the House of Representatives shall be deemed conclusive evidence of the right to vote. Section 4of that Act provided the modes of breaking up the Electoral Roll for the House of Representatives into Rolls for the election of members of Provincial Councils. There was nothing said of these minor Rolls being conclusive evidence of voting right. On the contrary, by the Regulation of Elections Act, 1870, it was laid down that the right to vote in the Provincial Council election was determined in the same way as the right to vote in the House of Representatives election. It appeared that on the Electoral Roll for Rama Rama mistakes had occurred whereby several voted who had no right to vote, and others were prevented from voting who were entitled to by the Act above mentioned. The learned gentleman proceeded to show that had the votes been scrutinised properly the return of Mr. Harris would have been secured. In support of his argument Mr. Gillies put in the affidavits of Mr. Benjamin Harris, and also several affidavits from voters of the district. His Honor granted the rule nisi, making it returnable for Friday, Ist May.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/PBS18740428.2.16

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume II, Issue 165, 28 April 1874, Page 2

Word count
Tapeke kupu
338

SUPREME COURT AUCKLAND. Poverty Bay Standard, Volume II, Issue 165, 28 April 1874, Page 2

SUPREME COURT AUCKLAND. Poverty Bay Standard, Volume II, Issue 165, 28 April 1874, Page 2

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