OHINEMURI LICENSING POLL

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LII, Issue 9, 4 February 1909, Page 2

OHINEMURI LICENSING POLL

'By Telegraph.—Press Association. Wulii, Lust Night. In conuection with thti petition tu upset the Ohinemuri licensing poll, Air. .Adams, for respondents, addressed the (Count. lie criticised the petition, and ttiiid its move at Jirst was to allege I charges of dishonesty and theft, and I also to allege dishonorable conduct on | the part of the returning olliier. Those | •veiled charges, he asiid, had been dropped and hopelessly failed as regards advancement of any proof in support. Jle also referred to the 1 suspicion as levied against Mr. Slevin regarding the keys, and the failure ol any dirc.-l ividence, a ad also referred to the statement made by Mr. UoberNiaw with reference to 1 alleged instructions on the part of Mr.

Nathan, suggesting perjury 011 the pa>'t of his deputies. Counsel next pointed out that under the Act of lUUI no poll lias yet been set a>ide. The. onus, he continued, of proving an allinnativ" ease, was u,p»n the petitioners, who had to show that the result of the poll was affected by irrrjiiilarHio. Kct'ening to the Akaroa election petition, he slid that ten out of eleven polling places had been closed -before the proper time, thus depriving certain elector* from recording their votes. 'I bat poll had been void. Quoting law reports in sup-

port, Mr. Adam-) reminded the Court 1 that it should be Jir>t sulUlied. ;i> a matter of fact and not of opinion, that the election had not been conducted under the provisions of the existing law before voiding u poll. He also quoted judgments by -Judges Williams and J)eii* niston 011 the matter of irregularities as liUelv to affect the reMilt of a poll, and also 011 the question of the evidence counsel referred tile Court, to, "Rogers on Election" (page 01), regarding the definition of "result'' as applied to a poll, which was not to be confused with the matter of majority. "Maxwell 011 Statutes'* was also quoted as regarding

the. HUesXiou of irregularities on the part of a returning oilicer, which should not bit held' to -affect the result of a poll or to alter the decision of the people. The whole case of the petitioner*,-he said, was based on an unfounded assumption that it was the duty of the returning ofiiccr to see that the voters voted in secret. Counsel allirmed in tins connection that such a duty was cast 011 voter* themselves. If the returning officers Were supposed to ''dry Jiurse' voters, then the whole method of conductin*' an election, -lie. contended, would linve to be rc-cast. Counsel then review-

Ed till! clauses of tlio petition at considerable k'.m?Ui, ami finally contended that tlio petition resolved itself into ullegutlons as made in clauses 8 and U re admitta.iice of more tlian six voters into till- boolli ill one time, ami on the question of secrecy. The volal allegations, lie submitted, had not been ill ■any way proved by petitioners, lie argued that the case was made u|> of assumption, insinuation, suggestion aatl exa""er.itiou, and the evidence was unreliable. deferring to the question of secrecy counsel pointed out that the contention ill tlie Talicto case, that there was 110 obligation on Hie part of the

returning oflieer to provide inner com-1 partmciils hail been upheld. The question therefore, argueil counsel, of secrecv was not -an irregularity, but all impi'oprietary Oil the part of persons .at tliii .poll. Quoting Constable Driscoll's evidence, he maintained that the voting compartments as provided weie sufficient for the purposes of secrecy, and voters could vote with secrecy if they liked. He deprecated Dnscoll s evidence, anil pointed out he bad amp e opportunity during his examination m thief to make the same statements as ■he ilid on being re-called. Not one witness, he contended, had been called to show that his or her voles had been

tseen No evidence hall been produced ■to show how any particular person had voted, or that a single licensing paper had been seen. Counsel quoted a length) list of witness covering the period ot the. alleged difficult times to vote, showln" that each witness,had recorded Ins vole without, delay or difficulty. In conclusion, counsel submitted that tile case for petitioners had been hopelessly and absolutely shattered. Mr. Adiuus icoimiieneeil his address at » o'clock, eonfinding at the adjournment this attei'"mi' Skerrett. oil behalf of the pct,iI tioners, addresses the Court to-morrow.