BAY OF ISLANDS SEAT.

Press, Volume LI, Issue 15269, 4 May 1915, Page 4

BAY OF ISLANDS SEAT.

HEARING OF ELECTION PETITIO-S*. CPKESS ASSOCIATION TELEGRAM.) AUCKLAND, May 3. . Tho Election Court resumed thia morning. Vernon Heed, cross-examined by Sir John Findlay, admitted that in a straight-out contest -with Dr. Buck ho anticipated a margin on either sido of not moro than 150 to 200 votes. Tiie retirement of Mr Wilkinson would havo considerably assisted witness ill the party vote. Ho denied having stated that ho was personally responsible for the Council offer to Mr AVilkinson or that Mr Massey had askt-d respondent to see him and find out definitc'y it" Mr Wilkinson would accept a seat in the Council, and ho could assure Mr Wilkin_on that ho would get the seat if ho assented. iSii- John Findlay: Did you pay Johnston's expenses? Mr Heed: Yes. Mr Johnston said ho could not afford going to see Mr Wilkinson. Respondent said: "Never mind, I will pay the necessary expenses." Witness added that h_ had no alternative. Witness stated that in Juno or July, 191-!, 'Mr Massey had asked him to •communicate with Mr Wilkinson respecting the suggested appointment to the Council. The previous offer to Mr Johnston personal ly was putely his (Reed's) own. Ho would not say Mr Jaeentho's evidence was an invention, hut he thought a good deal of it was the result oi imagination. He did not challenge the honesty of Mr Jaeentho's evidence. Johnston, recalled hy Sir John Findlay, stated that to the best of his recollection Mr Heed, when making the oJTer, _aid that if Mr Wilkinson retired he could have a 6eat in tho Upper House, if he preferred it to fighting an election. Ho distinctly stated that Mr Massey was behind the offer. He had received,,Mr Massey\s written reply to his letters .after Mr Reed had made the offers. Vernon Heed, recalled, denied having ever undertaken to assist Mr Wilkinson at a by-eiection when ho (Reed) retired twelve months after the general election. This concluded the evidence. In his address Mr J. Heed, K.C., argued for respondent that there could ho no corrupt practice without corrupt intention. Tho evidence in Jaeentho's ease was very slight and suggested that Jacentho acted from a personal motive. It was inconceivable that a candidate would have been so foolish as to permit tho approach by anyone of Wilkinson or his agent. Underlying tho action of both Mr Massey and respondent was tho desiro to help tho party. All that was dono was douo before Mr Wilkinson was announced as a candidate. Was Mr Johnson not solely the agent of Mr Massey? He wou'd not have moved one inch for respondent. Sir John Findlay said the Court was askod to say whether it was legal for a party in the ascendancy for tho time being to remove tho opposition from % that party's candidate by giving an opponent a seat in the Upper House involving navment from the public purse of £1400 and other emoluments. It was far from being legitimate or a nroper thing where the parties came before a demo"ratie constituency for tho Premier, tho sitting members, or anyone else to endeavour to remove from tho contest by means of a bribe of a seat in the Legislative Council, a candidate who threatened a supporter of the ascendant party afc that tion. The principle* profoundly affected future elections. The retirement of Mt Wilkinson at lenst indirectly 6e"nred tho return of Mr Reed. Mr Reed could not procure the seat, but he was a party to the promise to endeavour to nro-uro a seat for Mr Wilkinson. Without the strict nilo of airency the door might be open to corrupt practices of a very serious chnra"fer. The Court announced that it would deliver j ud_■•-**• •-•'■t, at Auckland not earlier than Friday.