STRUCK OFF THE BOLL.

Evening Post, Volume CIV, Issue 49, 26 August 1922, Page 7

STRUCK OFF THE BOLL.

Strange as it m»y,ieem, there are persons inr. New Plymouth whoi h»tr« not Heard of Mi1. VVJ. T. Jennings. Mr. Jennirigs told the story jn the Houre of Eepresentatives yesterday to illustrate a question that he was asking regarding the electoral rolls. He said that he made inquiries, and fouhd: that his own name had been struck off the roll in New Pljmouth, and :^h«x he asked the reason he wag informed that the /postal officials, did not kno\t',.tlie name of W. T. Jennings. He had other examples of persons struck off the roll, though they V had -.'.'feted; iii the eftme locality for many election*. JJnder^tha old system of sending a card ta notify that a name had ijeensttucH.i off jtherai was some safeguard, but it now appealed possible that,' unless there were-the. old provision that an elector might vote if he could.prove that hi» name ht^i bees wrongly struck off tber* jfsoJiJbe dmgex

of manyelietori beta* dldraacbiMd, la the Waitomo eiectoms 3600 name* bad I been removed from the roll. \. ,*| The Prime Minister said ibai uta": tnnately it was found at every election that. persons- who wished to vote had had their names removed frooi the roll. The officials had to do their, best t* : obtain a olean roll, and he hoped that ' sufficient'interest in public affairs would . be displayed by the eiectors so that they':: ■would make certain tnat' their name* were on Hhe roll. , ; The question asked > by Mr. Jennings might have the (food ■ " effect, of drawing sttenion to the necessity for this; The law gtill made tlrovision that an elector whose ttMne had. been wrongly removed coold obtain the" right to vote by proving to the return- ':■ innjoffioer th«t he had/votid at the previous election. It was not intended. to. change this provision. : v-:./.'--^'-.'.-'''.-'.'':'-.-'-.'.'