Poverty Bay Standard. PUBLISHED EVERY TUESDAY, THURSDAY AND SATURDAY MORNINGS. Thursday, December 22, 1881.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume IX, Issue 1015, 22 December 1881, Page 2

Poverty Bay Standard.

PUBLISHED EVERY TUESDAY, THURSDAY AND SATURDAY MORNINGS. Thursday, December 22, 1881.

We shall sell to no man Justice or Right; We shall deny to no man Justice or Riyht ; We shall defer to no man Justice or Right.

From a political point of view, the telegraphic news published in our last issue that three of the Judges of the Supreme Court would meet shortly to draw up rules for their guidance under the Elections Petitions Act, will have an ominous sound to the ears of some of the candidates recently returned to Parliament. The austere legislation of last session under the form of the Corrupt Practices Prevention Act, and the Regulation of Elections Act seems to have utterly failed in carrying out its express object. When, those measures were debated in the House the outcry raised by members was against the undue monetary influence brought to bear in election contests — an influence, it was argued that placed practically the political power solely in the hands of the wealthy. So statutes were made teeming with clauses full of penal consequences to wrong-doers, but what did they avail ? Even in our own district, where the election was carried out with becoming decency, and apparent regard for the majesty of the law, the fact could not be concealed, that every available public vehicle, as well as private carriage was busily engaged in conveying electors to the poll —at whose expense it matters not. In other parts of the colony the law has been more openly outraged. We learn from a contemporary that there have been no changes from the usual surroundings attendant upon election contests. “ Vehicles laden with electors have rolled through every street; placards have adorned the walls and windows ; banners have been displayed ; committees have met when and where they liked ; and there has been eating, drinking, and making merry.” And all this went on in open defiance of a most stringent enactment to the contrary. Nothing can more clearly shew the thorough ineffectiveness of the existing law than the great difficulty that arises in fixing the guilt upon transgressors. The penalty to be suffered by any candidate found guilty of corrupt practices is not only the forfeiture of his seat, but a liability to a fine up to £lOO, besides absolute disfranchisement for five years, and loss of any public or judicial office he may hold within the meaning of the Act, at the same time there are so many loop-holes in the Act that only in the most glaring instances, can there be any possibility of furnishing the requisite amount of legal proof to have a candidate’s guilt established. From all parts of the colony come rumours of proceedings threatening to be instituted against candidates for illegal practices. Mr Downie Stewart who was defeated by the Hon. Mr Dick, by one vote, complained openly at the declaration of the po'l that his rival’s victory was due to his (Mr Dicks) having employed vehicles to carry electors to the poll on the day of the election. Of course Mr Stewart experiences a certain amount of political anguish when he contemplates the causes to which he owes his exclusion from Parliament. Many other cases of a similar character are on the tapis, but in the majority of instances when the bitterness felt by disappointed candidates has subsided, the prosecutions will probably be allowed to drop. No doubt when the House again meets, members, guided by the experience derived from the late election, will cause important amendments to be made in the present law. The existing law is overcrowded with details of a minor character as to the conduct of elections. Many of these minor points may possibly be repealed when the Acts come to be discussed upon their ; merits. The greatest strin-’enev should, ‘however; be provided against all

fraudulent means for obtaining votes, such as personation, double-voting, and bribery. The privilege of the ballot is too sacred a right to permit of being tampered with, and no elector who places the true value upon the privilege of the franchise will object to severe punishment being meted out to all perpetrators of the offences named.