MATAURA LICENSING PETITION.

Mataura Ensign, Issue 1139, 22 January 1903, Page 2

MATAURA LICENSING PETITION.

TUESDAY'S PBOCEEDINGS. The enquiry into the Mataura licensing petition was continued on Tuesdav before Mr G. Cruickshauk, S.M., Messrs Hosking, Hanlon, and Neave appearing in support of the petition and Messrs A. S. Adams and J. Macalister to oppose. Edgar Pope, baker, Edendale, deposed that he had acted as scrutineer for the licensing poll at Edendale, the schoolhouse of three rooms being the booth. Witness described the arrangements of the room in which the poll was held, and stated that these did not ensure the secrecy of the voting. From where he was he could see people voting. It was an easy matter for those standing round to see how those in the compartment voted. Voters complained of. the want of S6creey and privacy. The returning officer said it was best he could do. The character of the room did not prevent further screens being used to secure privacy. Several illiterates came to vote, and were assisted by the deputy returning officer. The returning officer objected to the scrutineers going in in several eases, and the scrutineers did not go. Subsequently he did not object. On two or three occasions there were more than orie voter in the inner compartment. This continued all the morning and part of the afternoon, but as the result of objections it was subsequently prevented. The returning officer and witness counted the votes for the electoral poll. They put the papers in the box, and locked the box and went out to tea. The returning officer told witness he need not go back afterwards to witness the sealing up of the papers. Witness saw one of the voters strike out the top line on the paper from where he sat. Albert Jones, millowner, Edendale, deposed that the arrangements at the Edendale booth were not as private as at the previous elections. There was not sufficient privacy at the booth, and witness drew the attention of the returning officer to the fact. For anyone who wished to keep his vote strictly secret it could not be done. Witness tried to screen his paper with his back, but a thin person could not do so. There was a general coinplnint amongst voters as to the want of secrecy. Cross-examined by Macalister : Witness exereioed care in voting, and thought he concealed his vote. Could not say if any other person could conceal the manner of his voting. Thos. Scoular, settler at Edendale, deposed th".t there was nothing to obstruct the view of persons recording their votes. The voting paper of a person not taking pains to conceal it could be readily seen. There was no privacy whatever about the arrangements. Be did not care who saw his vote, but it would be awkward for those who did care.

Geo. Dempster, hotelkeeper, Edendale, deposed that the arrangements at the Edendale booth were very bad. There was no privacy between the two voting compartments. A person in one compartment could see a voter in another compartment voting. There was nothing to obstruct the view of the voters from any part of the room. Mrs Dempster deposed that while voting she caught Pope's eye on her voting paper, arul he saw her voting. Witness saw her sirtf-r voting from another part of the room while she (witness) was talking to a lady in the booth.

Andrew John Traynor, carpenter, Wyndham, deposed that he was poll clerk at Wyndbam, Messrs Currie and Allan (licensing) and Golding and Drurnmond (electoral) were the returning officers. Saw one of the ballot boxes turned out. The other one (M to Z) was not. Mr Drurnmond complained of that, and Mr Allan said he looked into the box. That was about ten minutes after the poll commenced. The poll was held in tho Courthouse. There was a mock trial in the booth between 11 and 12. It lasted from ten minutes to a quarter of an hour. They got a prohibition order against one of the returning officers.—(Laughter.) The returning officer did not object. The policeman was informed that the order had been taken out, to apply to the Wyndham and Tuturau districts. There was no voting going on at the time. During the day Mr Allan left his table, and went to the corner of the room to have a discussion with a lady. He was away ten minutes. Witness drew the returning officer's attention to the incident, but he said he could do nothing. Cross-examined by Mr Adams : In the mock trial the scrutineer took the magistrate's position. Mr Golding imitated a solicitor.— (Laughter.) John Milne, hotelkeeper at Alexandra South, deposed that he was scrutineer at the Wyndham licensing poll. Heard Mr Allan spoken to about the ballot box not being emptied. Allan replied that it was too late to open it then as there had been some papers put into it, but he bad looked into it himself. There did not happen to bo anyone in to vote during the mock trial. Witness took no part in it. Golding told witness they had tried one drunk, and had taken "out a prohibition order against another party.—(Laughter.) D. Nutsford, poll clerk at Wyndham, gave evidence as to the complaint that Mr Allan's box had not been shown empty in the presence of the poll clerks and scrutineers. Witness' roll had several pages missing. Stewart Dewar, postmaster at Gore, gave evidence as to the method of signalling '.I o'clock to all permanent telegraph ollices in colony. All the post office clocks were regulated by that time. At a place like Otamita on the telephone, the exact timo was supplied whenever it was asked for.

Miss Healey deposed that she received two papers at tho Gore booth. One of the men followed her into the voting compartment and asked for the paper back as he had given her the wrong number. Witness refused as she had already marked tho papers. Ho took the papers from lior and gave her two more. Did not know who the man was. Witness put the second papers in the ballot box. Malcolm John Middleton, farm servant at Pine Bush, deposed that the arrangements at Pine Bush secured no secrecy, as there were more than one voter in the compartment at the one time. There were two others in with witness. Those who were in the body of the room could see how persons were voting perfectly easily. Witness got his electoral paper first and voted, and was told he bad another paper to come, and then got the licensing ballot paper.

Theodore Anderson, hotelkeeper, Pine Bush, gave similar evidence. Edward Traynor, who acted as scrutineer at Mimihau, deposed that there were two apartments in the booth—one for tho licensing poll and the other for the electoral poll. Voters got one paper, voted, and then went back to the returning officer and received tho other paper. The compartments were cut oil by blackboards on easels, leaving a space of about six inches between the top of the desk and the bottom of the blackboard. Witness could have seen behind the blackboard if he had chosen to look. Would have an idea how any person was voting if he had chosen. Voters loitered about after voting. A man present, sitting reading a paper could see how people were voting in one compartment. Cross-examined by Mr Macalister : Could not swear how any person voted. Did not trouble about it.

John Latham, jun,, deposed he was scrutineer for the licensing poll at .Gbatton. On several occasions the two papers were not given out simultaneously.

Mr Hosking said that was all the evidence they proposed to tender at that stage. It all depended upon the nature of the evidence called by Mr Adams whether he would require to make an application to his Worship to be allowed to call rebutting evidence. With the exception of that, and the right to call Mr McGrath (who could not then be present) that closed the ease for the petitioners.

Mr Adams, reserving his opening of the ease for the defence until next morning, called the following evidence as to the allegations regarding Gore booth : Jas. Boyne, returning officer for electoral district of Mataura, deposed that he presided at the Gore booth. Made the arrangements himself, and appointed his own officers. Reached the booth on the morniiw of the poll at half-past eight. All the subordinate officers were there shortly afterwards. There were three subdivisions of the booth—A to F, G to (t, J to '/.. The staff was ready at two minutes to obA- At nine o'clock told the officials to record fctseir ;»o;,es. Sent out two messenger boys, opened tneoutii'doi;r to let them and Mr Martin, out. Told the doorkeeper to record his vote. Closed the door and kept it closed, with his hand till the doorbeeper came back, witness remaining at the ■oooi There would be eight voters in each booth a4lh ; ..t time. iSpoka to several at the door before "the '"do*: j Leeper came back, and told them they eould net' co&:e ;n till those inside had finished voting. When iut stall had finished voting, gave orders to open the door, which was done. Siw no interference with voters, nor any other irreanlarities. Pjd ngt hear of voting papers being taken

from voters by poll clerks. Did not believe anything of the sort took place. Heard the poll clerks ask voters to show the seal. In the afternoon the passage-way was frequently crushed. Strictly enforced the rules as to regulating the number of voters in the booth so far as he could. Saw no interference with voters. The Dacre papers came to hand, and the telegraphed return did not agree with the written statement. Mr Ayson's (scrutineer) return agreed with the telegraphed return. Opened the packet and counted the votes to ascertain where the discrepancy occurred, and the numbers agreed with the telegraphed return. In the whole district there was only a difference of two in the number of voters in the electoral and licensing poll, that being accounted for by two shearers only voting on electoral proposal. The door was closed at Gore to allow the officials to vote.

Cross-examined by Mr Hosking: When the ollicial statement and the telegraphed return from Dacre did not agree witness decided to open the parcel to ascertain what the correct number was, as that was the only way to do it. Opened it in the presence of Messrs Ayson and Miller. There was a side door to the hall which was used as an egress for voters.

Andrew Martin deposed ho wont into the Gore booth at a quarter to nine. Remained till a minute or so after nine. Heard Mr Boyne tell the officials to get ready for voting. Mr Yule came in at the same time, and then went out. Heard Mr Boyne tell some messnere boys to go out, and witness also went out. There was a side door to the hall used as an egress by the voters. Showed several volers in at the side door.

Cross-examined : While the door was closed for a little in the afternoon there wore a number of people wanting to vote. Witness took a number of supporters of his (the Liberal) side in at the side door to vote. Had not taken in anyone to vote "continuance." He took no interest as to whether they were licenoe or no-license, lie wished to get the support for his candidate. Mr Hosking pointed out that Mr Martin Mr Smith, and the returning officer had sat in the Court all day, although the witnesses had been ordered out of Court. He wished his Worship to take a note cf his objection. E. C. Smith deposed that he had acted as a scrutineer at the Gore booth. Had heard the statement as to taking papers from voters. The poll clerks did not snatch at the voting papers. In sonic cases the poll clerks pointed out that they were folded wrongly. In some cases the voting have been seen by those at the table. In some cases the papers were taken by tiro poll clerks to tee the seal. Cross-examined by Mr Hosking ; The poll clerks did not attempt to examine the papers all through the day. There were more cases or. thu electoral side. It was not on account oi stupidity but over-can fulrcss on the part of voters, the papers being folded too carefully. At this stage tho Court adjourned till halfpast nine on the following day.

YESTERDAY'S PROCEEDINGS. When the Court resumed yesterday morning Mr Adams said he proposed to call a number of witnesses, but before doing so he w.iuld deal with certain'aspccls upon which he wculd call evidence. The bulk of the allegations contained in the petitiou hud lieen withdrawn, and even his friend would admit that not the slightest shred of a ease had been made out for the petitioners. There were 27 allegations in the petition. Six had been withdrawn, and on thirteen others no evidence had been offered. Dealing with the various paragraphs of tho petition, counsel said the right of no single elector had been prejudiced by voting papers not having been given out simultaneously. There was nothing in the allegation that suggestions had been made to persons to strike out the top line, neither. was there anything in the allegation as to persons loitering in the booth and touting. It was a pity so many reckless charges had been made and then withdrawn. Counsel contended that the present inquiry was different to an ordinary action where two parties had a genuine dispute. In tho present case instructions had been given to upset the poll, and all the letters of the alphabet had been used to designate different allegations except x, y and /.. Mr Honking : These represent the unknown quantity which the Magistrate has to ascertain. We had evidence on all tho points when the petition was drawn out.

Mr Adams: You have not called the evi dence. therefore your case hah failed.

Mr Hosking : If wo have ono good point it does not matter much about the rest.

Mr Adams, continuing, said so far as paragraph V of the petition was concerned as to permitting more than one voter in the booth at a time, and thereby permitting undue influence to be exercised over voters, the sting was in the tail. The mere tact of move than one voter being in a compartment at one time was not the salient point. There was not a scintilla of evidence brought of a single voter being sought to be inllucnced. The fact of there being the number of voters who received papers in the electoral and licensing poll:; proved that no one was piejudiced in the free exercise of his vote. The allegation (j as to the returning ollicers failing to count the votes as required by law had no evidence to support it except from Edendale. Even there it was not shown that the votes had not boen properly counted. He proposed to produce evidence that at Edendale the votes were properly counted. Allegation H as to the ballot, boxes not being shown empty before voliDg began related to Wyndham, and there was nothing in it. As to N—voting papers having been issued in mistake, taken back, and fresh papers issued, the only evidence as to that was given by Miss Healcy. o—that the returning ollicer at Gore improperly opened packets of papers sealed by his deputies, had no bearing on the inquiry. Whatever happened then was completely cured by the recount. P—that scrutineers at Edendale were told that they need not be present at the final count: Scrutineers did not rtquire to be present unless tbey chose. As to Q, attacking the privacy of voting compartments evidence would be called on that point. T— that more than six persons were permitted in the polling booth at one time. Counsel contended that the provision as to that was directory and not mandatory and a breach of it was not sufficient to upset an election. It should be shown to have had a tendency to defeat the fairness of the poll before it could have any weight. Counsel then addressed himself to the law points involved. He said the petition had been filed at a quarter to four on the last r'av for Coing such a petition. An adveri sernent relating to the petition and fixing the uaie ot the inquiry appeared in the Matauiu Bnkkin of that same day. The Ensiu.n was published in Gore and circulated throughout the Mataura electorate and to a small extent in the neighboring electorates. The first impression of the paper was printed and delivered in time to go north and south by the midday trainsthree or three and a half hours before the petition was filed. A later impression of the paper came out at any time between two and half-past three, and the half-past three train took the papers to Wyndham, Edendale, etc. The Magistrate ; Surely you are not going to ask me to sit in judgment or my own conduct ? lam not going to do it. Mr Adams : It is a question of jurisdiction, and I have got to raise the point here. The Magistrate: You will have to go to the Supreme Court (or that. lam not going to say I am a fool.

Mr Hosking: The only allegations my friend can inquire into arc those which have been raised in this court.

Mr Adams: The petitioners chose to leave the filing of the petition to the last moment for filing. I purpose to prove that the date of the inquiry was fixed before the petition was tiled. The tiling of the petition calls the tribunal into existence and no one has any jurisdiction to do anything in a nonexistent matter. Till the petition was tiled there was no right to fix a date for the in quiry. Your Worship did what you could to help the petitioners out of the hole they put themselves in.

Mr Hosking : Does my friend contend we could have tiled the petition sooner? Mr Adams : The petition was filed too late and what was done prior to the filing was a nullity. There is no inquiryThe Magistrate: I am going to stand by what I did. If Mr Adams moves in the Supreme Court I will file an affidavit. Mr Adams'continuing.said if the petitioners le;t the waiter so late it was impossible for ai'iy&ik to put the petition in order for them. As to the Hedgdiope case there was no evidence that called " lor .j, reply The evidence showed that McKing (deputy returning officer for the licensing poll) was ready to start with the voting before nine o'clock. It was suggested that he could not start because Wilson had the seal, and Wilson bsing late made the licensing poll late. By the Act of 1902, il was not necessary that a seaj shoujd be used. " Official mark " was all the Act prescribed. There was nothing to

prevent McKay putting an oßicial mark on the ballot papers without waiting lor Wilson. Therefore the whole of the evidence from Hedgehopo was of no value. It was absurd to say that the legality of the licensing poll depended upon the ollicials of the electoral poll. As to Waikawa Valley, he did not propose to call evidence. The bouse of Mr Jus. Templcton was the booth, and he contended so long as the electoral officials were in the same building as the implements of voting were kept there was no irregularity. There was nothing in the Act to say they must be in the same room. There was no evidence to show that any voter had been turned away while the officials were at their meals, and the only voter who came had tea with them and voted afterwards.

The following evidence was then led for the defence :

James Sloan Millar, a Justice of the Peace, deposed that he was present when the signatures to the petition were obtained. Saw everyone sign the petition whose name appeared, until witness signed the declaration before Mr Beattie. The petition did not leave his presence till then. Saw Mr Yule and Mr Esther sign the petition. Very few asked what the petition was for. A lew asked and Mr Neave explained. Geo. Evans, divinity student, assisting the Rev. Mr Johnston at Fortrosc, deposed that he acted as scrutineer for the no-license party at the Waikawa booth. A fresh table was brought in just before the poll opened. The poll opened before nine. Aftei the boxes were, locked some one asked the time and it was eight minutes past nine by witness' watch. The. booth was closed at six o'elick by witness' watch. There was a suggestion at halt pa;t live, ten to six and again at live minutes to six to close the poll as the last voter had come, but witness resisted and the poll was kept open till six. Cross-examined by Mr Hosking : Set his watch within a mouth or two of the poll. Witness 1 watch did not agree with the others at the booth. There was no dispute about time. Witness would not be sure if his watch was- live minutes fast on the day of the poll. It was not true that the poll was opened late and delayed correspondingly in closing. The poll may have been fifteen minutes late by Troup's time. There was no suggestion that the booth should be closed late to make up for the delay in opening in the morning. Chits. Davis, who acted as deputy returning officer for the licensing poll at Otainita, deposed he arrived at tbe booth at three minutes to nine. Got the time at the Goie post office on the previous evening. Closed the booth at six o'clock. Was ready for voters at nine o'clock. Miss Gwynne was the first voter. Wus not sure what time Mr Carroll came into tbe booth.

Cross-examined by Mr Ilnnlon: It was between eight and nine o'clock at night when he compared his watch at Gore, and he was ten minutes fast. Looked at the post office clock through the window. There was no light in the office, but it was light enough to see. Caroll told witness that his watch was fast and witness said if it were so he would close a corresponding period later to make up. If the time witness took from Gore was correct ho would bo two or three minutis late in starting.

John Dunn, farmer at Otaniita, deposed he acted as scrutineer for the licensing poll at that booth. He arrived at twenty minutes to nine. Davis arrived at three minutes to nine. The bjoth was closed at six.

Cross-examined by Mr Honking : Witness' watch was two ltr-iuitos before Carroll's time. Did not remember Wayte altering his watch. Davis said bis watch was different imd ttmt he would make allowance lor it. The poll closed at six o'clock exactly. Thomas Goliteu, deputy returning olliccr for the electoral poll at Pine Bush, gave evidence as to the arrangements at the booth, stating that the secrecy of the ballot was not violated, that theie was no crowding and no loitering about in the booth.

Cross-examined by Mr llanlon: Would swear that anyone sitting at tbe scrutineer's table could not see behind the screen. If Mr Middleton said so it was quite untrue.

Wm. Brash, who acted as scrutineer at the Pine Bush licensing poll, gave similar evidence.

James Allan, deputy returning otlicer for the licensing poll at Wyndhain, said Mr Currie occupied a similar position in the second booth. Witness ariived shortly before nine o'clock. Opened his ballot, box, called the attention of Mr Shaw, one of the scrutineers, to the box and then locked it. Witness could not remember any interference with the voters. The secrecy of the voting was secured. There was nothing serious in the mock trial and it did not interfere with tho business at the booth. To relieve the monotony of tho proceedings some funny remarks were made, but that was all. Cross-examined by Mr llanlon : No mock trial took place. Somebody made it remark that a prohibition order had been taken out against witness—(Laughter). There was no trial of a " drunk." There was only a remark passed. Did not know that Mr Truynor had complained about witness holding a conversation with Mrs McLauchlan. Was not talking to her for ten minutes. Told Mrs McLauchlan to let a certain person know that someone else had voted in Ins name. There was no undue crowding or inconvenience to voters.

Samuel Shaw, scrutineer at the Wyndhiun licensing poll, deposed that he saw Mr Allan i'Pdii his ballot box. Witness looked into it saw nothing but a tew spiders, which witness thought would do no harm. There was no crowding, no interference with voters, and they suffered no inconvenience. Andrew Simpson, scrutineer at the licening poll at Wyndham, deposed that no mock trial was conducted during the day. Some joking remarks were made.

11. S. Drummonrt, deputy returning ollieer for the electoral poll, and W. J. Currie, deputy returning ollieer for the licensing poll at Wyndhum, also gave evidence. W. Hocidinott, schoolmaster at Kdendale, deposed that he acted as deputy returning ollieer for the licensing pool at 'that place" and arrived at (lie booth (theschoolhousel hefore nine o'clock. Witness described the arrangements altho bo-th, and said if a voter desired to conceit! the manner of his voting it would be physically impossible (or anyone to overlook him. The scrutineers sitting at the table could not see more than the upper portion of the voter's body. Had acted ns returning ollieer on five previous occasions in different parts of the colony. He considered that no more was necessary to be done at the booth to ensure the privacy of the voting. More than one illiterate lady voter object- d to the presence of one of the Fcrutinecrs in the voting apartment. One lady objected lo the presence of the licensing scrutineer; witness gave her the necessary instructions, and they left her in the compartment alone. After the poll was closed the results were counted tip on u blackboaid. The used ballot papers were replaced in their respective boxes. Some of the scrutineers were unwilling to return for the packing up of the papers, and it might have been suggested to them that they need not return. Witness returned after lea and fixed up and sealed the packets "t uted ballot papers. Jones complained in a bantering manner of the arrangements at the booth. That ,vas the only complaint from anyone.

Cross-examined liy Mr Uanlon : It could not he true that a lady saw her Bister voting. It would not be untrue for Mr Pope 10 s'ate that he saw people voting. Witness did not :;ive the children an object lesson on the day after the election on how to vote. lie did not tell the children he had had large experience as a return ng ollicer. He examined : There was a story about that Mrs Dempster had seen her sister voting between the two apartments. Mrs Dempster told witness that after having voted herself ■■he saw her sister in the next compartment. She could see her body, and her elbow moving in the act of voting. Wra. Hall, scrutineer for the no-license party at Edendale, Alex.Cranstnn and Daniei ..oss gave evidence as to the arrangements at Allendale, and stated that no one' could see how they voted. This concluded the evidence.

Mr Adams Hi n addressed the Court. He said the Court should be guided by the principles governing Parliamentary elections rather than the principles of the llegulation of Local Elections Act. An to the question of time, the principles of common law ought to apply. Subsection <> should not be construed to give arbitrary directions to tbe magistrate, but he should be guided also by well known decisions upon Parliamentary elections outside the statutes. Counsel referred to the Pa tea election case, in which ono vote stood between the parties, and on its being proved that one vole was ilk-gal '.be election was set aside, in the Akaroa case, however, though it was proved that all the booths save one were closed too soon, the flection was not upset, as it was bold that Mr Joyce, having received a majority ot 700 votes, the result could not possibly have been materially affected by the irregularity. Counsel did not contend that the same principles applied in the case before the Court, but the Couit being constituted on analogous lines lie argued that his Worship should search loi such principles in the learned judges' dcci sinns as were applicable. The matter was highly important. Ono judge said the election of a member was not lightly to be s-t aside, and counsel contended that the import ance of the situation was emphasised mn move strongly in the present case, as the will of the people was most vitally concerned. Under sub-section <>, the Court should only act with extreme caution and not set aside tbe poll unless substantial unfairness to one side or tbe other were shown. At Gore. Waikawa Valley, Otatnila, lledgehope, nod Waikawa the qiies'.ion of tune had been rai.-ed. At Gore be submitted no irregularity was proved. lie -bad already referred to Waikawa Valley and Hodgehope. He would u ,k his 'Worship what was meant by the poll not bong open "''turn the proper limns and open beyond the proper hours. The crux of the position as to lime was tbe j meaning ot the term " poll " whetliu il line! i a mechanical meaning or the meaning .4, [plied bv nil statules and judgments, llm legal definition ol " poll " was the act of recording a vote giving or r< ceiving vole:.. Uy section 7 sub section 0 of the Alcoholic Liquors Hale Control Act of Kl.', the meaning of tin! word poll was the operation of, and not tin' place of, voting. Thcdietionaiy meaning of pull was a head a counting of bends. '■ A poll of the electors of mcli uisli icl shall btaken" meant counting tbe heads or votes. Tbe poll was an operation and not 11 place. When a place was indicated by the Act it was by the words •'polling place " or "polling booth." Under section 10") of the Electoral Act of 11102 power was given to a returning otticci to close or lawfully adj.mi 11 a poll 111 certain circumstances. In all sections' of the statutes there- was only one meaning attiched to poll the operation of recoiding votes. Thot was the crux of the position, and the fallacy of the petition in reference to place,, where the question of time was laised. To apply that to Gum: The theory of the peti lionets was the timber and iron theory that tbe building constituted the p-ill, and that if any part of the bui'ding was closed ihe poll was closed. That was an utter fallacy. The doors might be open and the poll closed, and conversely the doors might be closed hiiil the poll open. Tbe opening ol a. d"or did not operotc to open a poll. The question was: Were the officers ready to take votes ' At Goictho act of taking the pull commenced immediately at nine o'clock, notwithstanding the shutting-to of the door because there wensix persons in each 01 the tooths legally recording their voles. The action of the re tinning officer in that lespeet was not only regular, but was eminently proper, ll the mechanical thcor.v was to prevail there was another door at the Gore booth to which electors had access.

Mrll Oi-kiiJK : That is the door you propose to get out of. Mr Adams : Yes, if I can't shut you out at the other. Continuing, conn: el said the (iore evidence failed to prove any 11 regularity which the Court should serioii: !y consider for 't moment. The ground for -etting aside an clcrlinn was if the dicing ton early or leaving open too late of booths tended to defeat the fairness of the poll. That the Legislature (which was tbe guardian ol tlie liberties of tlie people) had deliberately in tendul that any accidental inteiferciice vvitli the mechanical talcing of the poll should defeat the will of the people was a view that the Court should be. very re.lue'unt to be forced into. It was inconceivable that the Legishi M tore should deliberately place pitfalls in thc4| vay of the people expressing their opinions. If his friend.s argument was conic:, cviiv poll taken could be attacked, and the law made every Parliamentary election sate ami every licensing poll iiiisslc. lie to',k it that the Court would struggle against aeecpling any iiilerpietiilion of tbe Act which compelled it to annul the people's vole if the provisions of tbe Act had been subslantially carried out. If tbioughout the (lis triet the operation of receiving votes whs delayed or carried on 100 long, that would be a ground for dcclaringtbe poll void under.,ub section as to time. Hut it there wen fewer booths than all at which such tilings occurred then the provisions of sub-section t'i as to irregularities applied. Ho long us thenpin tion of receiving vole.; was going mi in any part of the district then lite poll w.i > net closed, no matter how many other booths were closed. The statutory meaning of the term " closing the poll'' was doting all the polling place;,. As to (iore there was no evidence of the poll being doted at all. Assuming that everything happened a, alleged it meant only that the poll u», delayed, but not closed. As to the iccreey of the ballot being defeated at I'mc Uu.-h, Edondale, and Mimihau, conclusive evidence had been adduced as to the first two places. As regarded Mimihau, there had not been tune to call evidence. Counsel submitted that on that score the evidence ia support of tho petition had failed to sati fy the Court that any irregularity worthy of consideration bad Occurred. Coun.-.el quoted the Wellington election ease, Atkinson v. Fisher, and said irregularities were proved which bad ■■.■ injuiious consequences, and it was the same in the. caso before the Cmirt. Theie was nothing in the scrutineers nut be ng present at the ofliciitl count at Kilen.lale, and us to crowding in the booths, the rcgul.i lions were directory and not ltiaudaiorv. Nor was there anything serious in the allegation as to persons loitering in the booths after voting. As to poll clerks taking papers awav from voters at Gore, tbe * would lind a dillieulty in believing the witnets who said he saw tlie poll clerks snatching the papers away from voters and putting them into the billot hoy. There was nothing proved only a suggc: tion that .-omething may have happened. ' A-suming subsection <i meant what his learned friend argued it . meant, there was not a shred of evidence d brought before his Worship that indicated 1 the faintest idea of defeating tbe fairness of the poll. That being so, it could not be said that the fairness of the poll was nlleete I. The inquiry whs no academical inquiry into ab -tract questions, but sub-lnntiiilly to try the right of the people to bold and maintain the result of the poll. He submitted, t|.iref„re,

with loiilidence, Unit tin: Muni Irate could only make an order if there had been r.ubstantial unfairness, which then; had not. The Court then ruse till l.'M. On resuming,