AN ELECTION PETITION.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIV, Issue 212, 6 March 1912, Page 2

AN ELECTION PETITION.

THE CHARGES AGAINST MR. R. , McCALLUM. M.P. By Telegraph—Press Association. Dunedin, Tuesday. To-day Mr. Justice Williams heard a »ummons issued at the instance of Mr. R. McCalkm, M.P. for Wairau, asking for further particulars of the charges made in a petition against his return on the ground of corrupt and illegal practices. Substantial matters in respect of which particulars were required were the names, addresses, and particulars on roll of electors who were alleged to have been treated, and place or places where the treating is alleged to have taken place, also for terms of. certain wagers alleged to lave been made, and for particulars of Mr. McCallum's expenses alleged to be 'in excess of the statutory limit of' £2OO, and also particulars of contracts for' vehicles alleged to have been employed on polling days. Mr. W. C. MacGregor, appeared in support of the summons, and Mr. J. H. Hosking, K.C., for petitioners (Wm. Carr, John O'Sullivan, and John Lankow). • ' ■" Mr. MacGregor said the petition alleged that at Picton, Havelock, Okaromoi, Seddon, and Mirzs, Mr. McCallum provided meat, drink, entertainment and alcoholic liauors to large- numbers of electors to induce them to vote for him.

Bespondent asked for the date or-dates of the occurrences named, the addresses and numbers on the rolls of those alleged to have been treated, the places where they were treated, and for the manner in which Mr. McCallum was connected with this as aeeessory. Mr. Hosking said he thought the places had been sufficiently stated. This was a eharge of "general treating," and possibly in ma»y cases they would be unable to give any particulars. Mr. MacGiegor: These cases should be struck out. He contended that the petition should set <out full particulars. Details were also required regarding the allegation that on December 7 large quantities of liquor were supplied by Mr. McCallum or his agents at Grove road, Blenheim.

In reply to his Honor,' Mr. Hosking •aid he thought to some extent they were entitled to further particulars. Mr. MacGregor asked for details regarding the allegation that at Seddon on December 7 and 14 large quantitiej of drink were .supplied by Mr. McCallum or his agents, and that an agent of Mr. McCallum importuned the electors, inquired for whom they were going to rote, and gave them beer; also regarding the allegation that at Mirza, after ballot, Archibald McCallum gave certain electors money to buy liquor in order to bribe them. Then there was an allegation that Mr. McCallum made contracts for the payment, for; conveying electors to the poll. He also asked for details regarding the allegation that Mr. MeCallum's expenses exceeded £2OO at the first ballot and £SO at the second, and the allegations that wagers made on the election caused votes to be cast for Mr. McCallum, and that a school teacher, named Humphreys, of Seddon, was employed as a canvasser. His Honor made an order in terms of the summons, except as to\ certain amendments. The parts struck out were: (1) As to manner in which Kichard McCallum is alleged to have been accessory to treating; (2) as to the contracts for conveyance of electors; (3) the exact terms and conditions of the wagers. With regard to the payments to Humphreys, his. Honor ordered that particulars as to electron expenses should be to the best of petitioners' knowledge and belief; also that petitioners are precluded from giving evidence in support of any charge or case in which particulars have not been delivered, except by leav« of the trial court. Particulars are to be supplied on or before Saturday, 9th inst., and the cost of summons are to be paid by petitioners to respondent.