DRAINAGE BOARD ELECTION.

Press, Volume XXXVII, Issue 5137, 20 February 1882, Page 2

DRAINAGE BOARD ELECTION.

B. Beetham, B r q., 8.M., fit is the Boeident Magistrate's Court on Satiud&y morning at eleren o'clock, to deliver judgment in the matter of the petition against tbe return of Dr. Prin§ aa a member of the Drainage Board for the duteict of Ohriatolianii North* weit.

1 The oaae was argued on the 9t_ instant, Mr Joynt appearing in support of the petition, and Mr George Harper for the re--1 spondent. His Worship now delivered the following t judgment:—Oa this petition it is contended , that seotion 3 of the Aot of 187S so for qualifies section 7 as to render any person i being a ratepayer within any of the several i districts into which the drainage distriot ib divided, capable of being elected for any one ■ of tbe said several diatriots. I do not nee | hew the provisions of section 2 can be taken 'in part and rejected in part. If the several . district* are to be deemed "the distriot" in r all oases, and under all circumstances, tbe t object of the electoral clauses of the Aot woi_ld . ba defeated, and the whole machinery of tbat rrtion of the Aot reduced to an absurdity, understand seeticn 2 somewhat in this t n-s._ner-.bsA when tha words " the distriot" i are used, that term may be held to include i the several bnt that when the term " several districts -*■ is need it need not neoes- ' sarily be understood to mean invariably " the dutriofe." If the expression "several districts " is iovarir.bly to mean " the distriot," ' ot what use would be tha restriction of tha i vote ia any elation to the etotora of acy ef ■ the -'seve» , _ districts "P .Tbe electors of r "the (whr„e) district," including all "the f severaldis-ricte," would be qualified to vote • at any We need nc* go further to I shew tb-s. The whole tenor and aeope of the 1 Aat, io far w ita station alaota an born*

oerned, seems to mc to warrant tbe eonelntSee that the several distrioU vote as several*? triote, and elect from candidates who atustb* qualified within their several distTJsts. I therefore, declare the eleotion of Henri Hereford Price void. ™

M* Joynfc applied that James Simod Parker, the other candidate and one of tb» petitioners, should be declared dnly elected in place of Dr. Prire. The 48th elauee of fcj£ Regulation of Local Eleotiont Act, 187& L provided that the Breident Magistrate might* after inquiry, deolaye an election void, &nj| might declare any other candidate to be dnly eleot«d. It wst provided in the 3rd sub. leotion of the second part of clause 60 of the tame Aot that if npon inquiry it e t> pawed "that the candidate was not capable of brine eleoted to or of holding the office to whioh he was declared to be elected," tb& election of such candidate should be void, " and the candidate next highest on the poll not being Already deolared to be duly elected, and whoso election v not void, shall bo declared to be duly eleoted." His Worship did not think any evidencewas given that Mr Parker was the- "ctndi. date next highest on the poll," Mr Joynt eaid he was the ocly other esjj. didate, and his Worship would remember tb*& Mr Harper for the other side admitted the affirmation in the petition that Dr Pritn and Mr Parker were the two candidates. The admission being made, no evidence was offered OD the point, and the Court would be held to be cognisant of the faot. His Worship concurred with thi« view, was of opinion that eubsr otion 3 of the second p«>rt of olause 50 of the Regulation of Loesl Eleotione Aot cot olutively settled the pointts to the power of the Churt to declare tha other candidate elected. He therefore declared the election of Henry Hereford PHib to be void, and Jatnee Biward Parker to bs dnly elected in bin place. Mr Joynt applied for costs under the 55th section of the Begolation of Local Eleotioa* Aot. His Worihip made the required order, th» code being speoifled. The Court then adjourned.