RAGLAN ELECTION PETITION

Gisborne Herald, Volume LXXIV, Issue 22317, 30 April 1947, Page 6

RAGLAN ELECTION PETITION

NO WRONGDOING RAGLAN POLL CASE FOR RESPONDENT ! COUNSEL'S SUBMISSIONS (P.A.) HAMILTON, April 29. “An outstanding feature of the case presented during the last fortnight is that those who expected some revelation of full-blooded electoral _ misdemeanours haye been disappointed. There have been no such revelations, as there were no such allegations." said Mr. T. P. Cleary, in opening the case for the respondent in the Electoral Court yesterday afternoon. •Mr. Cleary said those who were disappointed that no wrongdoing qr malpractice had been revealed might be likened to persons wno had been lured to see a bull fight, or similar spectacle, but who were put off with a lantern lecture by a local vicar. Mr. Cleary, who with Mr. R. Hardie Boys appears for the respondent. Allan C’heyne Baxter, opened his address to the Court late in the afternoon at the conclusion of the case presented for the petitioner, Hallyburton Johnstone, by Mr. W J. Sim. K.C.. Mr. A. L. Tompkins and Mr. R. E. Tripe. Technical Objections Addressing the Court, Mr. Cleary said the petitioner had built up his case by objecting to a large number of votes on a variety of technical grounds, and the re.-pondent must in self-defence make the same kind of objections, joining issue with the petitioner on the battleground be had chosen. Recalling that Mr. Sim in outlining the petitioner s case had classified his objections, as first, to voters not qualified to be on the roll: secondly, to the allowance or rejection of certain ordinary ballot papers and, thirdly, •to certain postal and absentee votes. Mr. Cleary said the petition was based entirely on irregularities, which might be called innocent or technical, if, indeed, one could dignity with the name off irregularities some of the grounds of objection pursued by the petitioner. “A layman might be forgiven for calling this petition a lawyer's petition." said Mr. Cleary. The respondent’s case .he added, must for the most part follow similar lines to the petitioner s case. As he had challenged Maoris, the respondent must challenge others. As he challenged an infant and an unnaturalised person, the petitioner must do likewise. The petitioner had chosen the weapons and the respondent must meet him with them. Voters Act Reasonably Mr. Cleary said the Court for a fortnight had been listening to objections by the petitioner against voters whom he conceded had acted reasonably and honestly. Under this process no person had been immune. The soldier who had acted in good faith overseas. the returned man who had lelt his home in Raglan and who on his return to New Zealand had stayed with his wife’s people outside the electorate while waiting for a rehabilitation loan, the rehabilitation trainee whose only home was in Raglan but who had worked temporarily outside the electorate to gain experience essential to qualify him for a farming loan—these had all had their votes challenged. Among civilians it was the same—girls v/ho had turned 21 years just before the election, a man of 88 years who recognised no other hofrie than

one in Raglan who had to seek a more congenial climate in the winter, people who were in housing difficulties and had to seek temporary shelter elsewhere than in Raglan—these were the people challenged by the petitioner, who asked the Court to say that he was the district’s representative in Parliament. Mr Cleary, discussing in more detail the oblections raised on residential grounds, said the respondent contended: — 1. That every elector must be entitled to claim a residential qualification in some electorate, since every adult nad the right to vote. - 2. An elector could ordinarily have only one residential qualification. 3. The authorities showed that where an elector had a bona fide home in one electorate and place of abode in another he has the option of claiming a residential qualification for either electorate. Choice of Electorate 4. Where an elector possessed of a residential qualification in one electorate resided temporarily lor more than three months in another electorate, he had the option of either retaining his qualification for the old electorate or claiming one for the new electorate. Mr. Cleary said an elector should have the right to base a claim upon temporary residence, if he chose, but that temporary residence should not be used to impose a new qualification upon him against his wishes and at the cost of forfeiting a qualification he had previously held. Counsel was still addressing the Court when the adjournment was taken. Previously Mr. Sim, after the concluding evidence on behalf of the petitioner had been fieard. said concern had been caused by a remark of the Chief Justice, Sir Humphrey O'Leary, during the morning, that the Bench was considering cases day by day. Mr. Sim said it had been understood that submissions were to be heard on various categories of the objections, and these submissions would be necessary in some instances before the Court could reach a decision. The Chief Justice gave an assurance that no decisions were being made in cases where the submissions of counsel might have a bearing on the matter, but there were some cases which depended simply on matters of fact. "It is in such cases as these that we are writing our opinion at the side of our notes as we go along,” said the Chief Justice. At the conclusion of the petitioner's case 179 foolscap pages of evidence, or nearly 72.000 words, had been lyped.