POMARE EXONERATED

Dominion, Volume 16, Issue 154, 17 March 1923, Page 4

POMARE EXONERATED

UNFOUNDED CHARGES ONE QUESTION REMAINS FAILURE TO DETACH COUNTERFOILS BY TELEGRAPH. —PRESS ASSOCIATION. Auckland, March 16. The hearing of the petition against tho election of Sir Maul Pomare for the Western Maori electorate was concluded at the Auckland Supreme Court, when Mr. Justice Hosking and Mr. Justice Stringer dismissed such of the charges specifically charged against the respondent as had not been withdrawn. This completely exonerated Sir Maui Pomare, and left the question whether the election should not be voided on the ground that as the counterfoils had not been detached from the voting papers the secrecy of the ballot had been destroyed- This point was argued at some length by counsel, and their Honours reserved decision.

When the proceedings opened, Mr. Justice Hosking said that thg Court had not had time to put its judgment on points so far dealt with into shape, but had written the part relative to the supplying of food, at Pukekohe, and the supplying of cars at Papakura by Willis There remained to be dealt with eight specific charges, and _ a charge of general undue influence, intimidation, misrepresentation, and irregularities, under which the only point to be deal with (if it was permissible to entertain it), was that relating to the non-detachment of the counterfoils from the voting papers. Eight Charges Disposed ofIn the case of the first of the eight charges—that of providing food, drink and entertainment—in the. Court’s opinion there was no treating, and therefore it was not necessary to deal with the question of agency. It had been alleged that food was provided for the purpose of influencing the voters, or some of them, to vote for the respondent; but the Court accepted the evidence of Perkins that there was no preliminary arrangement of the kind mentioned. It was demied that the cost of the food had been charged to anyone. The Court thought that on the facts the act of providing food was unpremed'tated, and that Perkins was actuated by the fact that, the Maoris were hungry. The provision had not been made in the interests of the respondent. Tlie Court was satisfied that the account given by Perkins regarding the hiring of cars a.t Pukekohe was genuine, and not a cloak to cover up a breach of the law. Moreover, if the evidence was reasonably open to an innocent construction, that construction should be adopted. There was also no evidence or suggestion that Willis was offered money by the Reform Party "or anyone else for the cars at Papakura. With regard to the charge that the respondent offered at Manaia to procure electors relief from the payment of county rates, the Court was satisfied that the charge had not been fully established, and further evidence could be called if it was thought n-wsssary. This left two specific ' charges—iihat relating’ to a promise of employment on railway works at Tauranga, and that alleging briber}’ and undue influenceresting on the evidence of Rangi Mariimaru. . The Court would be more satisfied if Pomare were called to give evidence, as the respondent had personal knowledge. It was desirable in the public interest that he should he called. Respondent Testifies. Sir Maui Pomare, in evidence, r said that it was the custom of the Ministpr in Charge of Native Affairs to refer important matters to the Minister representing the Native Race. Witness explained the course he took on receipt of a telegram from the Native Mitu on November 14, in relation to ther displacement of Natives by Europeans on the railway works at Matanihi. He referred it to the Minister <*f Native Affairs. Subsequently, at a Tauranga meeting, he read an answer from Mr. Coates to (his 'telegram, which was merely a- copy of minutes. His reason for reading the Minister s telegram was that some of the Natives who considered, they were suffering a grievous injustice were present. Beyond reading the telegram and leav:ng copies, nothing further was said oi <ione about the wire. He had never asked the Natives to vote for him. Witness denied making any threat that he would punish those who did not vote for him. As regarded the interpreter’s license, witness said he had received complaints . that the holder’s cheque had been dishonoured. He had lent Rangi £2 to pay Ins board, but had not been repaid. He denied giving-Rangi authority to spend £2O on his behalf. Arnold John Conway, secretary to tho Minister, gave evidence corroborating that of Sir Maui Pomare in re-o-ard to certain interviews Mr Justice Hosking then announced that the Court considered the charge in respect to Rangi, and that alse in respect to the Matapihi incident not proved. Possible Origin of Charges. By way of general comment, the Court, criticising the evidence in regard to many of the charges, said that the method by which it was got together might give an explanation of a circular that was sent in the .name of Rataua. Beginning with religious invocations, it went on to ask tor information concerning bribery connected with various matters. No doubt that circular had been much discussed at various villages, and had caused a large amount of current gossip. JNo doubt many people who had beard tne gossip had taken it for fact. Otherwise, the Court was at a loss to account for a good deal of the evidence that had been given—evidence that on the face of it appeared to be without foundation. , ' The date of decision upon the counterfoils question will be h x^d the Judges at Wellington on April 9.