THE POLL.

Evening Star, Issue 21823, 12 September 1934, Page 8

THE POLL.

“ Pko-di-gi-ous !” exclaimed Dominie Sampson, and it is the only word to describe yesterday’s rating poll. The danger of such polls, when they are held apart from other issues, is always that a zealous minority will got its way through the carelessness of the majority, large numbers of whom do not take the trouble to vote eitTier because they assume too easily that their own cause must be successful or because they forget the time till the time has passed. The voting on such polls is seldom large. When one was taken on a proposal to extend the Public Library some years ago less than one-sixth of those eligible were concerned to record their opinion. At the Arcade vote, a little earlier, less than 30 per cent, used their ballot papers. More important than either of these was the poll taken in August last year to raise the large amount of £IBO,OOO for a water supply scheme, but the proportion of those who voted only just reached 30 per cent. Yesterday 58 per cent, went to the polling booths. The proportion was larger —nearly 67 per cent. —for the rating poll that was taken three years ago, but that was combined with all the local body elections, which included a close contest for the mayoralty. The result of yesterday’s poll was as satisfactory as its dimensions, giving it as great a character of representativeness as could ever be expected in its circumstances. The “ rash innovation ” that had been proposed at a particularly inopportune time was rejected by a margin nearly double the one that was registered at the first trial. About 300 more votes were cast against the proposal, and 2,000 fewer for it. At the earlier poll, out of thirty-one polling places, there were nine where the votes for unimproved rating were in the majority ; yesterday there were only two out of thirty. The 1931 poll was the most decisive that had ever been taken on the issue in the dominion. Yesterday’s was still more emphatic. We had stated the desirableness that the proposal to change should not only be defeated; it should be defeated with such an emphasis 'as would cause the expense and trouble of contesting it again to be avoided for much more than the minimum time of three years. As far as anything short of an amendment of the 1 law can assure it that has been assured.