CHECKING THE VOTES

Evening Post, Volume CXIX, Issue 109, 10 May 1935, Page 8

CHECKING THE VOTES

SEVERAL DAYS' WORK

A RECORD POLL

The recount of votes cast on Wednesday is in hand at the Town Hall by a staff of 45 clerks under the supervision of the Chief Returning Officer, Mr. J. Norrie, and will probably occupy several days, though the result of the recount of votes in the Mayoral issue should be known this evening or tomorrow morning. The most interesting recount will be that of City Council votes, for the positions of the fifteenth and sixteenth candidates are not so far removed that a change is impossible. Mr. Duncan has on the first count a lead of 96 from Mr. Parlane. In 1933 Mr. R. L. Macalister led from Mr. P. M. Butler by 24 votes on the first count, but when the recount was completed Mr. Butler had gone up to fifteenth place, and a seat at the council, table, with a margin of 117 votes, and that not because he gained votes on the recount, but because he lost less than Mr. Macalister. An unusual feature of that election was that, with one exception (Mr. T. Brindle, who gained five votes) every council candidate lost votes on the second count through many ballot papers being then thrown out as informal, and as a consequence of the alterations the order of successful candidates was considerably changed. It is unlikely that this factor will be a great one this year, for the cross system of marking has proved much more simple to electors, so much so that the number of' discarded ballot papers in the first council count, 635, this year was only about a fourth of the number m 1933, and in the recount even this .small number is being somewhat reduced. IRREGULAR MARKINGS. : Most.of the irregular papers have too many names marked with crosses, but others have a mixture of markings n names with crosses and then struck out as well, crosses marked and scribbled put, or started with one diagonal stroke and not completed. These irregular, markings are also found 'on'the'straight-bu'f Mayoral and loan issues, and other papers were returned' marked in' such a way as to suggest that the voters did not wish to cast a vote either way. All doubtfu} ballot papers are put on one side arid later given special attention by the Returning Officer and by the scrutineers appointed to. look after the interests of particular candidates, or parties. The comparatively small number of .votes which may be allowed out of. the 635 ballot papers at present regardedas doubtful, which in any case will be divided up among candidates, is not likely to make much difference in the final result, nor will the 450 declaration votes, of which the greater number are in respect of the loan issues. In local body elections no provision is made for absentee voting. The elector must present himself in person at the polling place, and the ballot papers may not be taken outside the polling place, hence those Wellington people who were out of the city on Wednesday, or who were not well enough to attend could not record their votes. The rule is not a City Council rule, but is laid down by the Act, and is so closely observed that though a polling place was established at the Public Hospital patients who were unable to leaye the wards could not record their yotes. • DELAY AT POLLING PLACES. :So unexpectedly great was the ballot on Wednesday, that notwithstanding the considerably greater provision made this year there was still delay. On the Mayoral issue nearly 41.000 votes were cast; which is getting on to double the vote of past elections, and is easily a Wellington and probably a New Zealand record. The following statement was made upon this subject by' the Labour Representation Committee today: "The secretary of the Labour Representation Committee has received a large number of protests from electors who were unable to record their votes at the municipal elections. It has been alleged that there was a shortage of ballot papers at the Basin Reserve polling place and that approximately 100 electors were compelled to wait for a considerable time, after being informea that more ballot papers were on the way. Some of those wishing to vote stood about for from one to two hours, and, as the papers were deayed, a number left, disappointed at jeing unable to record their votes. It is true that some waited till after 8 p.m. and recorded their votes, but others did not have that opportunity either because of other engagements which had to be fulfilled or on account of the cold evening. Citizens found themselves in the same plight at other polling places, though the delays were shorter. Another matter referred to ;he Labour Representation Committee s that officials in several booths were ignorant of the electoral law. It is alleged that quite a number of women electors were advised by the officials .in charge that though their husbands were, ratepayers they were not entitled to vote on the loan proposals and in some cases did not record any vote at all. These-matters are regarded by the committee as very serious and call for an investigation by the authorities." RETURNING OFFICER'S STATEMENT. The Chief Returning Officer, Mr. Norrie, this afternoon made the following .statement in reply to the Labour Representation Committee:— "A very large poll was anticipated and to meet this probability an additional 20,000 ballot papers were printed and distributed. The difficulty arose through the exceptional rush in certain polling places as compared with the experience of previous elections: At certain places where in 1931 and 1933 there had been comparatively small ballots there were on Wednesday surprisingly heavy ballots, and vice versa, with the consequence that there was an oversupply of voting papers at some places and an undersupply at others. During the afternoon cars were busy .running between the polling places checking up supplies on hand and where necessary transferring papers from one place to another. Between 6 and 7. pjn. there was an exceptional rush at certain of the polling places arid the difficulty then became greater, hut in no case was. an elector who waited deprived of his vote. In order to further meet the position 224 polling .booths were provided this year as. against 201 in 1933. As to the second point, instructions in writing were supplied to all Deputy Returning Officers (and also in a different form to poll clerks) and these instructions were further explained at meetings held in the Town Hall on Monday and Tuesday, when questions were invited and answered. Only about one-third of the, Deputy . Returning Officers were members of the City Council staffs, the remainder being selected from outside clerks and others, largely with a view to affording some relief to those out of employment. Deputy Returning Officers could act only on the information set out in the rolls. The ratepayers' roll is compiled from the valuation roll, but local authorities are not in possession of the fact that a rate-

payer has or has not a spouse unless i application is made by the spouse for 1 enrolment. In such cases, had the position been, explained, a vote by declaration should have been allowed by the Deputy Returning Officer at the booth, but in the event of this being refused, inquiry at the Town Hall would have rectified the position." CORRESPONDENTS' INQUIRIES. Several inquiries have been made by correspondents on various points: Q. Can a ratepayer in arrears with rates vote on loan proposals? The reply is that the qualification to vote as a ratepayer holds good. Q. What did Mr. Semple mean by his reference to the 2000 plural votes? Each company has a "company vote," and thus the principal of a firm or company may vote as an individual, and after complying with the formalities, may record a vote on behalf of the company also. A person who owns property in the city and resides at Lower Hutt may vote at both places. Q. Does the property vote extend to deceased estates? In the case of properties administered by joint trustees and where the trust is on the roll, one of the trustees may be appointed, in compliance with certain formalities, to vote for the trust property. Q. Did the Labour Party know that they could have nominated Mr. Semple for both the Mayoralty and for the City Council? • . ■ Yes, the position is quite clear from a reading of the Act, and Mr. Semple and the Labour Representation Committee were fully aware of it. The same . question was raised four years ago when Mr. Luckie contested the Mayoralty against Mr. Hislop, but there is generally a disinclination to nominate the Mayoral candidate for the council as well, even though it means that the services of an experienced councillor are lost.