AN ELECTION MATTER.

Wairarapa Age, Volume XXV, Issue 10713, 5 June 1913, Page 5

AN ELECTION MATTER.

PETITION DISMISSED. (By Telegraph.—Press Association.) ; HASTINGS, Ikst Nig^it. An important magisterial decision, relating to the conduct of local elections, was given to-day ,in a petition to render void the election of Mr Eustace Lane-as the representative of the borough of Hastings on the Napier Harbour Board, on the grounds (1) that Mr Lane was ineligible to stand, his name not being on the Hastings Borough electoral roll; (2) that the Returning Officer, in giving public notice' required by the Local Elections and Polls Act, 1908, failed to appoint a day, not more than seven days (exclusive of the day of election), before the day for nomination of candidates. In dismissing the petition, the Magistrate, Mr McCarthy, held that the day of nomination was riffhtly fixed, and that Mr Lane was eligible for a seat on the Board, in that his name was on the roll used at the 1911 election, it being the roll that 'should have been used at the poll under review, the roll actually used being invalid, in that it was not completed before April 1, the time fixed for the completion of the roll under the Municipal Corporations Act, 1908, and regulation 17, > which reads:"lf from any cause whatever the district electors roll is not made out and oompleted so as to come into force it the prescribed time, namely April 1, the roll to be used at the then ensuing election shaM, apart from any extension, under section 368, be the roll in force at the preceding election." Mr McCarthy's decision concludes: "What, then, is the position? As the election has not been conducted under an invalid roll, and an allegation to that effect is contained in the petition, and there is rjo proof before me as to any divergencies, but one, between the two rolls, how then, can I say use of the invalid roll has materially affected the result of the election? Mr Lane polled 525 more votes than the next highest candidate, and it is thought to upset his election by a mere technioal point. The Court will not lightly upset an election by reason of the irregularities of electoral officers, for which the successful candidate and electors were in no way responsible, and at which neither he nor they have in any gen.se of the word connived. In my.opinion, the petition should be dismissed, and it is dismissed accordingly, with costs against the petitioners."