THE ELECTORAL COURT.

Auckland Star, Volume XXXVI, Issue 254, 24 October 1905, Page 5

THE ELECTORAL COURT.

TO''mjlAß.O-XTECMONS.

EXPLANATION BY THE REGIS- ■'' TRAEL v r

Mr R. W. Dyer, S.M., sat in the Magistrate's Court to-day to bear objections of electors as to the'eTectprarolls compiled for the West, Central, and East constituencies of Auckland City, v .• '.',". ''.',"-.. AUCKLAND WEST. At 10.30, the hour appointed for objection to the Western roll, only His Worship, and the Registrar, Mr H. C. Ralfe, were present. •••'"• '■'<■

Mr ;I_alfe read the section of the Ac under which the Court was held, and Submitted a list of names of persons whom he desired to have struck off th< roll. He stated that letters sent to these persons'had been returned from the post office.marked found,'-' and he had accordingly objected to their names being retained on the roll, and had referred the names, to the police for report as to their whereabouts."The names referred to. tlfe police numbered 597, but this number, by transfers to other districts and by some of thenbeing found qualified to be "retained on the roll, were finally' reduced to 28S, which he now asked should be strucl off the roll as not having been found It appeared that some irritation had been expressed at his out ob jections to persons entitled to remain on the roll, and be wished to .explain that as the Act required such a length of time for service of objection, and as lie took 'up the work, so late in the day, it was impossible for him to institute inquiries into the right-of the' electorsto be retained on the roll before having to send out the objections. He there fore first sent out the objections in order to conserve his legal right ob ject before the issue of the writ, anc 1 then made his inquiries afterwards This course seemed to have caused con siderable irritation. The notice could have been worded differently—in thform of an inquiiy whether they stir resided- in the district, and he wouli then probably have received a poiit' reply instead of a considerable amoun' of abuse. -"But he had been utterly un able to avoid the course he had taken for want of time.

His Worship said that so far as he could see there had been a considerable amount' of misconception as to wha J was the Registrar's proper course. The Registrar by send out objections simply intimated that be wished to be itformed whether the elector still pos sessed the necessary qualification ioi remaining on the roll. It was, of course, quite out of the question to expect the Registrar to know every person in the city, and if he instituted personal or minute inquiries about every individual elector the work would never be finish cd. He considered that the course Mr Ralfe took was the course required bj the Act, and was certainly tbe most sensible and the speediest ione. If an elector came and satisfied the Registrar that he had the necessary qualifications his name would be retained on the roll without further trouble. Some electors, however, had evident !y misunderstood the purport of the objections, and bad taken them to mean that the Registrar was hostile to their being on the roll. Probably the wording of the notices was'unfortunate, but that was provided for by the schedule.

Mr Ralfe said that some of the ob jeetions would never have been issued if the fieldsmen had performed their work accurately. But they- apparently had missed whole households to which he had consequently objected without excuse, and he had to bear the blame of the fieldsmen's shortcomings; However no names objected to were lost sight of. and those who proved their right to h? retained would be entered on tbe supplementary roll.

His Worship said that if inaccuracies had resulted from laxity of the fields men, that was the registrar's misfortune but not his fault.

Mr Ralfe then read over his list of 288 names, and on oath gave evidence of having sent out notices of objection and. received no proof of qxialification.

No electors attended, and His Worship ordered that the names should be struck off. CITY CENTRAL. One case only relieved the dull routine of tbe revision of the City Central roll. This was a contested objection to Mr George Higgins' name.

Mr McVeagh appeared for Mr Higgins and Mr Montgomery (the Registrar) appeared in person.

The objection was originally based on two grounds—that the City Central was not Mr Higgins' Usual place of abode, and that he bad resided at Howick. The second ground was, withdrawn.

Mr Higgins said he was a boot and shoe dealer, and had a shop at the corner of Queen-street" and ,Grey-street in the City Central electoral district. He had resided in Auckland for 20 years, and had been on the city roll for a great many years. He paid the rates of his shop (£3O odd per annum). He had a residence at Howick, where his wife resided occasionally, especially in the summer. He himself resided at his place of business, and slept there. Taking the whole year round, he was not at Howick more than a average of one day a week.

His Worship gave his decision that Mr Higgins had shewn that his principal, place of abode as defined by the Act was at his Queen-street shop, and he was therefore qualified to be on the City Central roll.

Mr McVeagh said his client had asked him to mention the subject of costs. He was aware that the Act made no provision for recovering costs in these cases, but his client desired tbe matter mentioned in order that it might obtain 'publicity; It was hard that the Regisrar should be moved by some person without any justification whatever to take the action that had been taken.

His Worship: All, I can say is what you admit yourself, that I have no power to order costs.

Mr Montgomery then entered the wit-1 riess box and produced a list of between ;■ 700 ; ; arid 800; names to whom notices of j objection had b(„n sent without producing any replies. 1 He asked that these names be struck off. v being; no objection offered, the names were struck off accordingly. t-&& ': : . CITY , : . . At £_S0 this afternoon the court was re-opened to revise the roll for the City Electorate. -.''.'