ELECTION PETITIONS.

Lyttelton Times, Volume XCVII, Issue 11189, 10 February 1897, Page 6

ELECTION PETITIONS.

[Per Press Association,! WELLINGTON, Feb, 9. WAIRARAPA. Judgment was given bv the Chief Justice and Judge Conolly on the motion to remove the petition against Mr Buchanan, from the record. Their Honors ruled that the endorsement on the writ sent by the Returning-officer to the Clerk of the Polls on Deo. 8 was a sufficient and official declaration of the poll. Consequently the petition was not lodged in time, and-must be dis L missed. An express declaration of the poll by advertisement was not essential. Comment was made on the negligeut construction of the petition. Sir T?. Stout applied for costs against the petitioners, but after hearing Mr Skerrett the application was disallowed. The judgment was very brief. WELLINGTON CITY. From documents filed in the Wellington petition case, it appears that both sides seek to have votes disallowed wholesale. Mr Atkinson objects that 22 persons named voted twice, that JO wore personated, that I t members of the Women’s Social League were guilty of treating, and that all the votes of members of this and other women’s leagues, besides about 300 others, should bo struck off, because they were treated. Publicans and others are objected to because they hired all the cabs in the town on election day. In many instances names are specified. Mr Fisher, on his part, objects to 40 votes on the ground of. personation, to 20 members of .the National Association for paving for vehicles, axid to a number .of other votes as void because the papers were not stamped. -Hy WELLINGTON’ SUBURBS. The hearing of the petition against the return of Mr Wilford for the Suburbs seat was resumed to-day. ' Standen said he had never spent a day at canvassing. Saw Mnlvaney after the election and advised him not to commit perjury in the witness box. Did not mean this as a threat that he,, would say something detrimental . about Mnlvaney if the lat/tei- hurt Mr. Wilford by - his evidence; Mnlvaney told witness that he had been a supporter of Mr Hislop.' Mv Chapman then called Mr Wilford. 1 Mr Skerrett objected An the ground that he was a respondent to.-the petition, but this was over-ruled by the Bench. Mr Wilford was examined upon .the Mnlvaney episode. He was told that the man was out of work, and had twelve children, and had lost a hand. When asked to give him a letter to. the Premier, ho thought he was doing what anyone else would have done under the circumstances. At • the interview nothing whatever was said • about politics, but he presumed Mnlvaney was a Liberal, or be would not have • come to witness. Standen did not tell him Mulvaney’spolitics. Two or three days after Mnlvaney came to see him, and witness told him to clear out, or he would kick him out. This was because he had been told in the interval that the man was a scoundrel. He had not spoken to Mr Seddon on the subject. The letter produced looked like the letter he wrote for Mulvaney. lie could not remember what he wrote. It was in his writing. Mr Chapman: Is that the letter you gave to Mnlvaney t Mr Wilford : I cannot say. Sir Justice Conolly: Surely. Mr Wilford: Well, it is on court papei and in my writing. The Chief Justice: Have you written so many that you do not remember ? , Sir Wilford said that the letter must be his. It was as follows; —“ Wellington, Oct. 25, 1890, —Dear Sir Seddon,—Let me introduce by this-Sir Joseph Mnlvaney, who is a supporter of myself in Karori and who did a great deal for Dr Newman on the last occasion. Sir' Mnlvaney has considerable influence in Karori and has to ask for assistance ■ from you, such as a nightwatchman’s billet or anything else that is suitable. Will you ,do what you can for him f —Yours truly, T. M. Wilford.” , Examination continued: Witness still adhered to the- statement that,ho had made. It looked to him now that there was some truth in Standen’s statement that, Mnlvaney had said a lot that they Could not understand.

Mr Chapman; I understand from you that the drift of the whole conversation was quite apart from elections P Mr Wilford: Quite so; that is still my impression. Mr Chapman: But do you think this is consistent with the statement in the letter P Beading between the linos, what did it mean ? Supposing your opponent had written this letter what would you think ? Mr Wilford; I should look at it-in the manner of a figure of speech. If I was asking you for a subscription I should probably begin it with, “ Knowing your benevolent and kind disposition,” though there might be nothing in it. . Mr Chapman : Is that all ? What is the object of it then P Mr Wilford: To influence the Premier’s mind. ,

Mr Chapman : Is not the inference to bo drawn thus, that if Mnlvaney got a billet he would use his influence in your favour. Mr Wilford : The inference to be drawn will be drawn by the Court. Witness did not recollect when he first learned that the letter had not been presented to the Premier. Since the petition he had seon Mr Seddon about Mnlvaney, but not before. He never warned the Premier about Mulvaney, but after the petition was lodged told the Premier that the matter had been arranged by Mr Hislop’s people. • • Mrs Ellen Hall, examined by Mr Chapman, said that she went with Mnlvaney to; the Government Buildings, but they could not see the Premier after waiting about half an hour. Witness had seen Mnlvaney before he brought the letter. Mnlvaney told her that it was best to work for the Conservatives “ because they had more money and Tom Wilford had none.” She advised him to keep out of politics if he was only after money. Four days before the election Muivauey told witness that he had “more money in his pocket than he should ever have got out of Tom Wilford.” Mulvaney said to her, “ It’s Hislop’s.” Joseph Mulvaney, carter, Karori Koad, examined by Mr Morisori, said that he was a Wellington Suburbs elector. He supported Dr Newmau in 1893. He remembered a conversation in October with Standen and a later one in Willis Street, when Standen started election talk. Witness told Standen that'if he could get a Government billet' he would uot mind supporting the Government. Standen said, “ Come along with me.” They went to Mr Wilford’s office, witness remaining outside, and Mr Wilford being out they went on to the court, where they found him. Witness told Mr Wilford that at. the last election he was a supporter of Dr Newman, and did his best to upset him (Mr Wilford). Mr Wilford said he was aware of that, and that he could take a licking. Witness told Mr Wilford of his accident, and said that some of Mr Wilford’s .supporters represented to him that he could get a Government billet. ' Mr Wilford began a letter and told witness that he would put him down, as a supporter. Witness hesitated, but Mr Wilford said that he must, or it would be no good. ‘ Witness told Mr Wilford that he had worked for Mr Hislop during the present election campaign. Mr Wilford suggested his writing to Mr Hislop. Witness explained to Mr Wilford his business relations with Messrs Hislop and Brandon, and said that, he should go and see him any way. When Mr Wilford wave witness the letter he told him to take it to the Premier’s office, and tell them it was from Mr Wilford, when he would be admitted.; He could not see tlie Premier, and a clay or two later witness met Mr Wilford, who told him that he had made it all right with the Premier, who would write to him. He saw Mr Wilford again later the same day, and asked him if he knew the contents of the letter the Premier was to send. Mr Wilford said an appointment as night-watch-man. Witness thanked Mr Wilford, and said that ho would go to Mr Hislop and tell , him that he had done with him. Ho had a lively half-hour with Mr Hislop.

He waited for a fortnight, hut did not r - ceive a letter from the Premier. Ho saw Mr Wilford during the fortnight, and told him that he had not received the letter. Mr Wilford said that there was plenty of time. Told Mr Wilford that Sir Hislop had “given him fits.” At the end of the fortnight lie wrote to the Premier, and received an answer two or three days after the election. Before the election he'told Air Wil ford’s agents—Airs and Mr Thomas Hall—that if the letter.was not forthcoming,, with ah appointment, he would turn on them and Air Wilford at the l eleventh hour. Two days before the electibq lie told Airs Hall that he was not going to, support Air Wilford any longer. He then saw Air Hislop. and offered him support,.,but.-ho declined. Two .or three weeks before’ the election witness was in the office of Air Thomas, Alolesworth Street, and read a letter saying'it was waste paper. Witness did not lead Mr W ilford to suppose that he could not read. Examined by Air Skerrett: Came to the Wellington district about 1888. Resided previously, at Waiiuate, South. Had blisi-' ness relations with Mr Hislop while there. Was committed at T’imaru for' obtaining goods by false pretences, Air Hislop defending ’ him. Had business relations with Air Hislop in one small case after coming to Wellington. Alet with au accident, and had accident insurance policies. Was twelve weeks in the hospital. Air Hislop had charge his claim about September last. Air Hislop lent witness JJ4O on October 4. (Witness hero produced in Court Mr Hislop s account, which Air Skerrett examined and found dated Oct. 21.) Two accident companies offered to compromise in lump sums of £i> 2 and .£32 respectively. Witness refused the-settlement, and asked Air Hislop to ad vance. him JHD on the security of the policies, which was done. "Witness 1 had seen Air Hislop a few days before seeing Air 'Wilford tile first time, and also introduced Air Hislop to various electors in Karori Road, at the latter’s request. He was frequently in Air Hislop’s office at this time. 1 Had not had a conversation with any person (besides Air Wilford) relative to the letter of introduction to the Premier. Seeing- that 1 Air Hislop was to stand for the Suburbs; ho -went to see the Halls. Airs Hall advised ■ him to doing on and he 'might do better for himself —Mr Wilforß- was paying his canvassers £2 2s a week. ■ «He should also endeavour to get a Government billet now his hand was disabled. .'She said -that she would see Mr Wilford about it. -Told her subsequently that ho wafe going tq fetch up Mr Hislop. She said she would not “bein’’ if he came, and'so it turned out. ■Witness was here re-examined as to the interview with Air Wilford at the court. He stated that he told Air Wilford that Air Hislop was acting for him in the accident case,'and asked Air Wilford, if he was going to work for him, would it sot be the thing to take the accident case from Air Hislop. Air Wilford answered in the negative, saying that it had nothing to do with the election. Witness saw Mr Gapes at the latter’s house regarding the election, and told him that Air Hislop was an old friend of his, but not that Air Hislop had lent him money to pay off Thomas. He might have gone back'to Gapes that night and offered the use of one room as a committee , room for, Mr, Wilford. At a date before the election, a date he did not recollect, Air Hislop sent for him to the office. Ho often went there in connection with the accident business. Air Hislop'showed him an envelope, saying a letter was there. On the day he wrote to the Premier he met Andrew Collins, and asked for an introduction to the Premier. All- Collins told him to write. He did not say to George Darrell, “ You may get Wilford in, but Hislop and I have got him fixed, and Hislop has a letter which will put him a vv-ay. ’ ’ Did not ask Richard Greeks ■whether he.could trust him. Did not say to Greeks, “ Can I trust you, Dick ; J Mind what I say to you is under my foot.” Did not ask Greeks who were Air Wilford’s paid canvassers on the election' day. Mr Hislop did not' have the use or pav for a committee room. Witness’ had One bottle of whisky in his house, twelve bottles of beer, one bottle of brandy; no gin and no schnapps. Got the liquor from Aldginnity’s. He paid for the liquor himself. He ordered it on the day of the election. He only asked in three people. Air Wilford’s supporters took charge of the house. He was not in' charge of the liquor. Remembered Air Hislop driving up that day. Swore that he didn’t ask Air Hislop to come and have a drink. Did not hear Gapes .ask Air Hislop what he meant bv allowing Alulvaney to dispense free ’drinks. Air, Hislop knew all about the billet from the Monday Air Wilford told him to clear out of his office.

Examined by Mr- -Chapman; Mr Hislop pressed him very hardand asked questions as to his change of sides. Told him the letter was never to be vised again oh the honour of a gentleman. As far as he was aware Mr Hislop kept the promise. He did not accuse Mr Hislop of breach of confidence. Mr Hislop had since had permission to ,use the letter. His removing to town had nothing to do with the .election. All the liquor on election day was not consumed. The consumers were leaders of Mr Wilford’s committee. Mr Hislop knew nothing about the liquor being in the house. Tlie Court then adjourned till to-morrow.