TE AWAMUTU TOWN DISTRICT ELECTION.

Waikato Times, Volume XXIII, Issue 1933, 25 November 1884, Page 3

TE AWAMUTU TOWN DISTRICT ELECTION.

The enquiiy into the legality or otherwise oi the election of the Te Awamutu town commissioners was held on Saturday before Mr H. W. Northcroft, R.M. Mr Gresham appealed for the petitioners, and Mr Theo. Cooper for the commissioners. This was an enquiiy into a petition signed by Messrs Stiehbiuy, as a candidate, and two electors, piaying that the election of the commissioners bo declared null and void on account of certain irregularities on the pait of the retaining officer, and which, it was claimed, affected the fairness of the election. That officer failed to make the declaration piescubed by the act until after the nomination. J?.enig misled by his watcli ho did not op^u the poll until after the hoiu of 9 a.m., and a host of minor mistakes, which only the fcitile biain of a lawyer bent on getting up a case, could lake up. The case being called, Mr Cooper took a preliminary objection. He said it was incumhent on Mi Gresham to prove that the petitioner were duly qualified to sign. He objected to the petition on the ground that Mr Stichbury was not legally a candidate within the meaning of the act, as his seconder was not on the roll of the county. He quoted .sections 15, l(j and 17 of the act, as defining who voteis shall be. Those entitled to vote should be on the county roll for one or other of the ridings in which the distnct is situated. He quoted section 4S Regulation of Local Elections Act. He said the petition now befoie the court is signed by a peison repi eventing himself to bo a candidate. He contended that Mr Stichbury was not a candidate under the act, and called on the solicitor for the petitioner to pio\e the signat'nies status. Mr Gresham said : " It will be for your Woiship to consider whether ho is a candidate or not." Mr Cooper asked to see the nomination papers. The leturning ofliccr, by order of the couit, produced them, and that containing Mr Stiebbury's nomination was evamined, when it was seen that Flank Robinson Gibson was the seconder, and, as it \v<\^ alleged, his name was not on the county roll, it was claimed the petition was informal, as Mr Stichbury could not be a candidate. N. T. Maunder, clerk of the county, was suoin. He produced the electoral rolls of the Rangiaolua and Mangapiko Ridings, and it was found that Mr Gibsons name was not on either of them Ithe town district is Mtuated m both ridings.) His Worship ruled that Mr Coopei'b objection was fatal, and that there was no petition before the comb. Mr Cooper asked under section 55 of the Regulation of Local Elections Act, that as the petition was invalid his Worship should order the costs to be paid by the petitioners, as the petition failed thiough their not being competent to sign. Mr (jriesbam submitted that the returning officer should be ordered to pay costs, as he had misled them by publishing Mr Stichbury's name as a candidate. He said the returning officer had misled them from first to last, and he thought he should be made to pay. Mr Cooper said the returning officer could not be made to pay, as he was not before the court. He said the returning officer was not responsible for any mistakes made in the nomination of a candidate ; that it was the candidates place to see that he was properly nominated by those who were qualified to do so, and the risk was his if mistakes were made; the returning officer was to receive nominations ; if there were any mistakes the court would decide afterwards He also said the court had no power to ?ive costs against the returning officer; that summary information would roquire to be laid against him if he had infringed the act before anything could be done, and in such case, if proved, he would be liable to a penalty of fifty pounds. Mr Gresham still contended that he should be made responsible. His Worship said he thought Mr Gresham should have made himself certain that the petition was legally drawn up befoie he brought it into court. The case was dismissed with costs £2 12s against the petitioners.

A SECOND PETITION FILED. A second petition against the election has been filed, signed this time by six electors. It was filed as soon as it was discovered the first was informal. It was lodged in the R.M. Court on the loth inst., and will come on for hearing on the 28th, but the case, it is expected, will be remanded, as Mr Cooper will be engaged in Auckland on that date.—(Own Correspondent.)

Th 3 Bad and Worthless are never imitated or counterfeited. This is especially true of a family medicine, and it is positive proof that the remedy inrittx ted is of tbe highest value. As soon as it had been tested and proved by the whole world that Hop Bitters was the was the purest, best and most valuable family medicine on earth, many imitations sprung up and began to steal the notices in which the press and the people of the country had expressed the merits of H. 8., and in every way trying to induce suffering invalids to use their stuff instead, expecting to make money on the credit and good name of H. B. Many others started nostrums put up in similar style to H. B , with variously devised names in which the word "Hop" or " Hops" were used in a way to induce people to believe they were the .same as Hop Bitters. All such preteuded remedies or cures, no matter what their style or name is, and especially those with the word " Hop" or Hops" in their name or in any way connected with them or their name, are imitations of counterfeits. Beware of them. Touch none of them. Use u6thing but genuine Amerioan Hop Bitters, with "a'bunch or cluster 6i green Hops on the w.hite label, and Dr Soule's name blown in the ' glass. Trust nothing else. Druggists and Chemists are warned against dealing in imitations of counter* , feit*.