THE WAITOTARA ELECTION PETITION.

Evening Star, Issue 7385, 3 December 1887, Page 4

THE WAITOTARA ELECTION PETITION.

The principal evidence yesterday was given by Henry Treak Mason, commission agent, Waverley, who said that he assisted in placing about forty names on the Waitotara roll. He would not swear that he had not taken persons to a public-house before or after obtaining signatures to claims to vote. He acted as secretary to respondent’s committee at Waverley. Walter Symes was chairman. Remembered the free lunch at Jacobs’s Hotel on nomination day. Thirty or forty electors from Fatea lunched at Jacobs’s Hotel on piling day. He had not more than four or five shillings in his pocket, and the score against him at two hotels was for drinks obtained during the evening after the close of the poll He had been warned by respondent not to run up any drink score during the day, but to pay cash. He had not received any money from anyone i» connection with the election. He paid all travelling expenses out of his own pocket. He occupied a farm at Waverley, which was stocked. There was one cow at present on-the farm. It was given to witness by Muldrocke, respondent’s manager, about two months ago. He had the cow on trial, and was to buy it if it suited, or could vetum the animal. Respondent sent him a letter of instructions for use on polling day. M'Leau told Symes and witness that Havid«on and Charles Cameron had waited on him about the LI received from respondent. When they questioned him, he asked them what business it was of theirs whether he gob LI from respondent. When he asked M‘Lean what there was in it, he said he had borrowed LI from respondent on the day of the declaration of the poll. He told them that he had an offer of LSO to LIOO if he ■would say that he had received this money as a bribe. He said he had told Cameron and Davidson that if they had come on that lay they had come to the wrong shop Witness could not be certain as to the time at which >TLean said he borrowed the money, but understood it was after the declaration of the poll. He suggested to him next day that he should make a declaration and he promised to come into town * next day and sign a declaration, but he did not come. Witness knew Smith and Lloyd, and had some conversatian with them on the day of the polling. Smith came to him about some grievance on bush matters, and asked him fco see respondent about it. Smith afterwards he had seen respondent, and that he would 1 leave the matter in his hands. He thought respondent had simply palmed off th« men on him to get them to vote. Witness said to Lloyd: “It appears to me you have a grievance, and as it has been lcft to me I will get Mr Symes to look into it with me: but I make no promise, and this has nothing to do with the election. They arranged to go into the matter the next Saturday after the poll. Understood that they were to inquire into the matter, and if there had been good reason for complaint they would recommend respondent to make compensation. He wrote to respondent about the matter, bat bad heard no more about it. He made Smith and Lloyd no special or farther promise. He spent no money whatever daring the hours of poflipg. In the evening he shouted for all handfl-rrfn-enda and foes alike were all free. He had no authority from respondent to expend any money for this purpose, or in assisting to eecore his return, and spent no money. Mr Bell re-examined, but merely to show agency ; and upon Mr Travers admitting Mason’s agency for all lawful purposes, the examination of witness closed, Thomas Ellis was next called. He said he was landlord of the Commercial Hotel, Waverley. There was 80me . d^, j Q 8 the polling day and some shouting. Me conldnot remember whether Mason was m the house on nomination day. He was m on polling day, and bad a drink by himself in tiie morning. His name appeared on witness’s book for W 4s 6d from January 6to toe present date. On polling day there was booked 16s 6d, but it could not appear as drinks. It went on toe slate because Mr Muon had no money in his pocket.