The Awanui School Committee Election.

Northland Age, Volume 3, Issue 39, 14 May 1907, Page 4

The Awanui School Committee Election.

An Auckland paper says:—After every election of School Committees the Auckland Board of Education is faced with the task of dealing with a long list of disputed elections. The first sign of the approaching trouble at Awanui was on the day of the election, when collect telegrams were received by the Board signed “ Russell, chairman Awanui School Committee,” inquiring whether both husband and wife could vote at the same meeting, whether a Maori could be elected to the committee if qualified, and whether a candidate nominated could be elected if not present at the householders’ meeting. To these the secretary of the Board replied that a Maori was eligible if qualified, both husband and wife could vote if qualified, and a candidate could he elected in his absence if he had. previously signed his consent on the nomination paper. After the election there came along another

oollect telegram stating that the householders' meeting had been held in the regular manner, (out was stormy owing to soma people objecting to natives voting. ’ The telegram went on to give the full list of those elected: —F. Russell, J. H, Smith, J. Brown, A. Walker, H. Subritzky, L. H. Claudet, and T. Richards. Then the Board received five pages of foolscap from Mr. Claudet, to tne effect that when the meeting was held it was unanimously resolved that no Maoris from Waimanone be allowed to vote at the meeting for election of the ohairman of the meeting. This was done for the reason that the Maoris had no children attending Awanui or Mangatete schools, and they had already voted for their own School Committee and were resident miles away on the gumfields. In the face of these facts Mr. Russell had taken charge of the meeting and ruled that the natives should vote, and upon this the whole of the householders, about 60, refused to take part in the election, with the exoeption of nine European householders from outlying districts. Mr. Russell then held a Maori election for the two European schools. One of those declared elected by Mr. Russell was a Maori living 70 miles away, a member of the native School Committee at Te Kao, who does not understand English. Another member was in a similar position as regarded knowledge of English. Mr. Russell then called a meeting oi the new committee to elect officers, but only himself and two Maoris sat down, the rest of the committee refusing to act, as a protest against the maunes in which the election had been conducted. Then the European householders held a meeting and elected L. H. Claudet. G. Atkinson, J. Hansen, F. Spanhake, J. Wilkinson, R. Spanhake, artl I Williamson. At the first election voting papers were taken outside the school by both Maoris and Europeans, no annual report was read, six Maoris from Te Kao (70 miles away) voted, and seven Maoris from Kaikoura (40 miles away) voted. A petition to the same effect, and asking the Board to declare the first committee election void, was also sent in.

On the other side Mr. Russell reported that the meeting of householders at Awanui was very rough, as a certain section of those present objected to Maoris voting. There was a large native settlement there, and the children attended both Awanui and Mangatete schools. “ On account of these people,” (the opposition) the new committee did not hold a meeting to elect a chairman, but would do so. He believed “ these people held a meeting after us, and formed a committee of their own and allowed the Maoris from their own side of the township to vote with them.”

Both sides made statements which represented “ the other fellows ” as quite undesirable personages on a sohool committee.

The secretary remarked that there was nothing in the Act to say that Maoris who voted for their own School Committee should not vote for the committee of the European school, nor was there anything to prevent their being members of both.

The Chairman said it was apparently shown there was a majority of the Europeans present at the meeting, and they retired and left the field to the others. They really held the power in their own bands. He had never heard before of a demand such as that made by the objectors, that the chairman of the meeting should be elected by ballot. Mr. C. J. Parr moved, “ That the election be set aside as void, and that a new election be held.” The whole proceedings seemed such a travesty upon the Act that the Board could not possibly uphold either election. The other party should have stuck to its guns and earned the eleotion. The motion was carried. May 26 was fixed for elections in 26 districts where the householders failed to elect the necessary committee.