WESTLAND ELECTION.

Hawera Star, Volume XLV, 11 March 1926, Page 5

WESTLAND ELECTION.

HEARING OF PETITION CONCLUDED. WIN FOR MR- SEDDON. (BY TELEGRAPH PRESS ASSOCIATION.) GREYMOUTH, March 10. The Electoral Court, consisting of ■Mr Justice Stringer and Mr JusticeOstler,, to-day completed the hearing of the petition of Mr James 0 ’Brien, ex-M.P., against Mr T. E. Y. Seddon, in his election as member for Westland. At the genefal election in November' 1 ; Mr Seddon was declared elected on the easting vote of the returning officer. At tlie conclusion of the case today Mr Justice .Stringer announced that the figures had been carefully readjusted and checked, and the final figures were: Mr Seddon, 4175; Mr 0 ’Brien, 4163. The court therefore held that' -Mr Seddon was duly elected by 12 votes. Mr Justice Stringer reviewed the case and said that. the petitioner’s main ground was that a large number of persons were illegally on -the roll. The respondent had made a similar claim. It was not sufficient to prove that electors had been absent for'three months; it must be (proved -that they had actually resided in another district for three months before the closing of the roll. Where the elector had a permanent home in another electorate but worked here, he could claim to reside in this district. The court’s opinion was that if a person had a right to be enrolled, the mode in which he got on the roll was a matter of procedure only. The Court Could not uphold respondent’s counsel’s contention that voting papers marked with a cross should be trqftted as invalid. In the opinion of the very capable returning officer for Weistland, such votes were valid and the court saw ho reason for disturbing his decision. The court had carefully considered the objections- raised by -tlie petitioner and had arrived at the conclusion that the following persons in the list were not qualified to vote: Robert G-. F. Blake. C. E. Heinz, B. R. Sword, Janet Sword, J. McCarthy, Mary Uren.. A number of electors had qualified when tlie poll closed, although not when they applied for enrolment. Regarding absent voters, such privileges must be exercised subject to the conditions laid down by the statute. If any elector failed to comply with the provision his vote was invalid. Three absentee votes would be disallowed. Regarding the two ballot papers marked “ajd” and “Too Irish, the court agreed with the returning officer in allowing these votes. lhe petitioner had failed to establish his claim regarding the “Buffer votes, the evidence on these being too vague to justify the Court granting relief. The court decided, regarding the ie-spond-ent’s case, that eight votes must be disalloAved, two of the voters being Maoris and,.not qualified:. Two absentee votes were also disallowed owing to a deputy-returning “officer failing to complete tlie declarations. The court held that where a voter crossed out the names ,of both candidates, if only partial in one instance, the vote was informal and should not have; been al _ lowed. Four papers had a cross against the name of one candidate, the other name not being crossed out, and, these votes were allowed. The court then delivered its judgment. Costs were allowed Mr Seddon on the highest scale as for a £5Ol claim, witnesses’ expenses -to he fixed by the registrar. The court indemnified witnesses against possible subsequent proceedings.