THE WANGANUI ELECTION PETITION DISMISSED.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 2797, 11 March 1882, Page 2

THE WANGANUI ELECTION PETITION DISMISSED.

[By Telegraph.] Wanganui, March 10. : In the decision bn the election petition yesterday, the Judges but delivered Separate judgments. The Chief Justice considered that most of . the alleged acts of bribery and intimidation were merely what may be expected in an election where parties were greatly interested on both sides, and’the statements made by canvassers to the voters, that they might suffer from particular -people by voting ’on a certain side, did not amount to intimidation; it was -merely stating the natural result' of spying, and pointing out what-was the-state, pf , the parties. He also Held that a threat from those who had not power to give effect to it was not undue influence. A threat must; be either made by , the person who; himself could carry it put, orlin'the case of intimidation, the threat that custom would be witheld by. the . Committee must be put' as coming direct from that, Committee, and from persons who could injure the voter in his business. He also held’ that when promises Of Bribery or Where thfedts Were Stated to be employed; but' no . attempt to give effect to tliem was proved, they were not used'.' ’'He further held that, although in election cases, the witnesses necessarily were not persons of a very good character or position in life, yet cases of bribery or intimidation must not be supported by evidence which would he insufficient to convict the alleged bribery or intimidation, were he on his trial for misdemeanour. In another instance where a canvasser had tried to induce nn old soldier to vote for Watt, by telling him that if the candidate did not bring the voter's land claim before Parliaiment, he (the canvasser) would forfeit five pounds, the learned Judge held that [t was not an offer./of ,pjoney : . but merely a mode adopted‘to enforce an opinion. In another instance his Honor laid down that where a candidate or 'agent: gives a voter/work during an election it is not bribery, unless a corrupt motive is shown. : Mr Justice Gillies held that in the case of threats of withdrawing custom the loss was merely precarious, and that if the loss'proposed to be indicted would seriously affect the saleable value of a man’# business it was clearly intimidation; hut the matter was purely one of degree of the infliction of loss, but it would be so Serious that a judge could direct> a jury to,convict a person of misdemeanor .! ” <'

The petition was dismissed with costs.