The Evening Star. PUBLISHED DAILY AT FOUR P.M. Ressurexi. MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 8, 1884.

Thames Star, Volume XV, Issue 4887, 8 September 1884, Page 2

The Evening Star. PUBLISHED DAILY AT FOUR P.M. Ressurexi. MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 8, 1884.

\ The irregularities attached to the coming election of members to fill the vacancies in the Borough Council caused by the annual retirement of one representative for each ward are just now apparently a source of interest to many people, bat more particularly to the candidates nominated, and especially to a party taking an interest which appears to be of a most intense character iv one candidate in each ward. The details of the case or cases are simply as given by us hereunder, and what cause there can be for the feeling already displayed—unless it be personal —we feel sure our readers will be as much at a loss to see as we are. On the 2nd instant, the day fixed for the receipt of nominations for the Borough vacancies—immediately after those made had been accepted by the Returning Officer, it was discovered that there was some doubt existent as to the formality of several papers put in, and the 'Returning Officer appointei for the Borough of Thames sought the opinion of the Borough solicitor as to * then* validity. The latter expressed himself to the effect that those portions of the papers objacted toi I and the omissions made in the nominations were not of vital importance; but, he | added that he " would point out wherein I all the nomination papers " were, in his opinion, defective,' I—i-that1 —i-that is, in the person to "whom they are addressed, viz., " The Returning. Officer for the Borough of Thames." The opinion goes on to state most clearly and elaborately how the Act provides that each ward is a separate dis trict for the purposes of the Act, and necessitates a separate election and a stparate Returning Officer. The nominations should respectively be addressed to the returning officers of the wards for which they are desired to be made. Another part of the Borough solicitor's opinion says that the Eeturning Officer could only arrive at the particular ward for which the candidate was nominated from the fact of his being nominated by two electors of a certain ward. This to our mind is a very serious objection to accepting nominations which do not state the particular ward affected. Upon tba

receipt of Mr Miller's opinion as to the illegality of the nominations made, the Town Clerk very properly placed himself in communication with the Mayor, who sought an opinion .of the Crown law officers on the subject, and the Town .Clerk asked instructions'from his superior cfficer as to what was best to be done in the situation. The Borough solicitor's opinion was forwarded with the communication. The Mayor telegraphed in reply that the Council should act on their solicitor's opinion, and later on wired that -—"Borough Council hare to appoint Returning Officer for each ward. If same person appointed, he will ha?e to appoint a substitute for each of the other three wards. Have applied to the Colonial Secretary for Order-in Council to get time extended for holding elections. Will wire you immediately granted, and then commence election de novo." This appears to be most conclusive, and calls for little comment As far as would seem rational to unprejudiced persons, the whole thing should be begun afresh, and no laches of law provisions be allowed to interfere with the validity of any election. We learn that the Borough Returning Officer did very sensibly not continue his duties in connection with this election, until steps were taken to further instruct him. The declaration of any member's election by one not authorised to make it is simply illegal. The Borough Returning Officer has de* clared Mr Farrell elected for the South Ward, but the officer was never appointed Returning Officer for that Ward, consequently he bad no power to do such an act. Things may be done regularly and in order, and it would be a pity that anything should be allowed to interfere with the regular course of law ; or that the action of any Borough officer or other persons, in dubiis should be permitted to invalidate any act of our local legislature. Should people, for no other motive than contradiction quote what has been done in the past, they should be reminded that it is undesirable to perpetuate error. In the course of the next few days this bubble will have burst, and doubtless a peaceful calm will have taken possession of those who now appear to be somewhat agitated in the matter.