Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

AN EXPLANATION.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir, —Evidently there was some misunderstanding as to the public declaration, last Thursday, of the result of the recent election. Mr Rhodes himself was not present, and some of us, at any rate, knew nothing of the matter until next day. As this apparent neglect on the part of Mr Rhodes and his supporters might seem discourteous to some, I have communicated with our late member, who informs me that the proceedings were quite out of accordance with the Act. The public nomination and declaration were abolished five years ago, and have not been in use since. The Elec*' Act provides that the Return’" '? ra *- shall give “ public noth’* ’* Officer (sea iuterpretati*" -' which means printed in * clause) a notice ceedm- some newspaper. The prongs were, therefore, not in accordance with the Act, and I have Mr Rhodes’s authority for stating that he had no notice of Hie public declaration ; that he is not aware of any such proceeding during the last three years ; that he came away anticipating that the Returning Officer would declare the result by advertising, as provided, and that he would certainly have remained in Temuka to thank his supporters publicly if he had any idea of the course the Returning Officer would follow. I trust you will kindly allow me space for these few remarks, which may explain what otherwise might seem discourteousness on Mr Rhodes’s part, and indifference or neglect as regards those who worked for him.— I am, etc., D. L, Inwood. Winchester, December 5. [lf this were sent to another newspaper it would not be inserted except as an advertisemen . It is \ urely an advertisement,—Ed.]

Cricket.— The match between Temuka 2nd and Washdrke was won by Washdyke on the first innings by 65 to 15. In their second innings Washdyke made 31, and Temuka 60 for three wickets. Rain prevented the match being played out.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/TEML18931207.2.20

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Temuka Leader, Issue 2591, 7 December 1893, Page 3

Word count
Tapeke kupu
317

AN EXPLANATION. Temuka Leader, Issue 2591, 7 December 1893, Page 3

AN EXPLANATION. Temuka Leader, Issue 2591, 7 December 1893, Page 3

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert