ACQUITTED OF COMPLICITY.

Shannon News, 6 March 1923, Page 4

ACQUITTED OF COMPLICITY.

UNAWARE OF NATURE OF GATHERING. * J DID NOT “TREAT” LADIES. AUCKLAND, March 5.* The Judicial Court, Judges Hosking and Stringer, dismissed 'the petition against the Hoh. C. J. Parr in connection with the Eden s election, holding that it had been clearly established that he was ignorant of the arrangements for treating, and he stands acquitted of all personal complicity in the corrupt practices alleged. The judgment of the Court as concerns the Hon. C. J. Parr reads: “The evidence, in our opinion, clearly establishes that the respondent and his wife were ignorant of the intention that the women’s meeting, for which he had fixed the date, was to take the form of a gathering’such as that de-' scribed, or until they arrived at the hall that there was to be anything in the nature of an entertainment. It is not shown that he knew anything beforehand of any participation of his committee in the arrangements, although, of course, on arrival at the hall he could but have assumed that the committee must have /raised no objection to the ladies using the occasion fo'r the purpose they did. It was 'also completely established that respondent himself ,was never called on to pay nor ever did pay any of the cost of the entertainment. This disposes of ; the contention that the re- * spondent; by remaining and taking part in the social adopted the acts of those concerned in getting it up so as to make him personally responsible'. To entitle that conclusion to be adopted it must be shoyn as a preliminary condition that respondent was aware of the facts and of a corrupt intention on the part of those concerned. The evidence, we consider, always established ; that he was ignorant of these circumstances so that he stands acquitted'Of all personal complicity in the corrupt practice alleged.” In concluding its 'judgment the Court said that much stress was laid on the evidence with regard to the actual payment of the expenses, but there was no evidence that the mert’s committee did so. The total expenditure was] £6 3/, including printing. The petition was dismissed. Their Honours held that in ordering the strawberries respondent probably rendered himself liable to pay in his private capacity, but that was different from being the principal debtor. They were satisfied that the ladies bona fide desired to hold a social afternoon instead of hearing a political speech. They were not subordinate agents of the committee, but independent actors. However, it was open, under the law of agtency, for respondent to have adopted their acts on ascertaining the factsftbut this was not done. A lavish supply of tea and . cakes might, according to circumstances, warrant an inference of corruption, but here the provisions were on quite a modest seal© and the instance an isolated one. Putting all the facts together, their Honours held that corrupt ’ intention on part of the men’s committee, or of Messrs Shepherd or Levy in particular, or on the part of the ladies, had not been • proved. ; The result, therefore, was that the charges against respondent failed, whether viewed as corrupt, practices or illegal practices, and the determination of the Court was that the respondent was duly elected. Their Honours added that each case must depend on. its own circumstances. In any case, during an election to tender a social to a candidate at which entertainment was provided was an unwise act, because it was calculated, as instanced by the present case, to render those concerned in it, as well as an innocent candidate, subject to suspicion and litigation.