OHINENIURI LICENSING POLL.

Auckland Star, Volume XL, Issue 52, 2 March 1909, Page 6

OHINENIURI LICENSING POLL.

THE COURT'S DECISION. j MINOR IRREGULARITIES. j (By Telegraph.—Own Correspondent) WAIHI, Monday. In the licensing petition judgment, the <maih points of which were wired yesterday, dealing with the question of secrecy, the Court Baid that the .provision of the Act with regard to each person voting in secret is absolute, and any infringement of that provision by a voter would, we think, render his vote invalid if it occurred wilfully or through carele.sness or indifference. The duty to vote alone and secretly is positive, and the voter must take advantage of the means provided so' to vote, if he fails to do so for any reason which he could have avoided he has transgressed, and his vote ia invalid; hub we do not think this can foe said of a voter Who enters a compartment) designed to secure secrecy, and who marks his paper as the law directs, intending it to be secret, and under the belief that he is alone, but who is overlooked .by another person who improperly, though it may be with no wrong motive, invades the privacy of I that compartment unexpectedly, and without the knowledge or sanction of the occupant. To hold otherwise would •be to inflict injury on an innocent person.

Regarding Constable Driscoll's evidence tb the effect that he saw about 30 times in what manner persons voted, the decision went on to say that Constable Driscoll says it was in endeavouring to assist them to find an empty compartment that he looked (behind the screens, and in so doing saw the ballot papers as described, and it is suggested persons waiting for compartments in which to vote, and looking for compartments in whihe to vote* would have the same opportunity as Constable Driscoll to see how other persons voted. There is no evidence, however, of any person in the booth at any time throughout the day tor the purpose of voting having seen how-any other voter was marking •his paper. There is no doubt that Constable Driscoll had opportunities in his capacity as constable of seeing more than the ordinary voter, and the complete absence of any .evidence of voters having seen how other voters marked the papers seems to us to show that it could not •have been a common occurrence, as contended.

With reference to the returning officer's action in opening an extra booth, the Court pointed out that only 98 vote 3 were taken by Mr. Nathan. Even if •the whole of these had been given by unqualified persons, a most improbable assumption, and all 'had been given adversely to the party complaining, the result would have heen that 98 votes would have been taken from the majority, and the total valid votes recorded wouli have been Teduced by the same number. This would still have left the majority in favour of No-license 49 over the required three-fifths. By his action the returning officer deprived the party opposed to .No-license of the right to have a scrutineer. According to the letter of the law, which gives the right to each party to appoint a scrutineer for eatfh ballot box, no default was made toy Mr. Nathan in not affording the opportunity -of appointing a scrutineer, as a separate ballot box was not used hy him for the voting papers he issued. But no doubt the intention of the statute is that there should 'be at least one scrutineer for each returning officer or deputy pesrding at a poll. This irregularity in itself, however, is not a ground for interfering with the poll, unless it can be shown to have affected the result.

Touching oo ihe matter of overcrowding, the decision eaid that the Overcrowding did not affect 'the result by depriving the voters of the opportunity to vote. It is proved by direct evidence and 6y tfie fact that throughout the day great numbers of persons (including even aged women) voted -without ixnreasona'ble delay or difficulty, and from five o'clock to the 'hour of closing very few votes were recorded. As already wired, the Court agreed that the election was an election by ballot, and that the irregularities proved could not affect the result. The majority in favouT of NoJicense was 88. THE HOTELS TO BE CLOSED. The 'hotels to ibe closed , as a result of the Court's decision, as from June 30, number 14, and are as fallows: — At Waihi: The Central, Sterling, Rob Hoy, and 'Waihi. At Wai-kino: The Waikino. 2K Karamg&hake: The Tramway and Talisman. At Maekaytown: The Mackaytown. At Waitekauri: The Waitekauri. At Golden Cross: The Golden Cross. At iPaeroa: The Commercial, Paeroa, Criterion, and Royal .flail.