POM SON BY SCHOOL COMMITTEE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXIII, Issue 10127, 9 May 1896, Page 3

POM SON BY SCHOOL COMMITTEE.

The dispute in regard to the election of the Ponsonby School Committee came up at the meeting of the newly-elected committee held in the Church-street School last night. It came in the form of a petition to the Board of Education, which was referred to the committee. There were present: Messrs. J. Patterson (chairman), J. Bell (secretary), J. Shaw, S. Martin, A; Mundy, W. J. Bees, C. J. Parr, and W. J. Ralph. The petition prayed the Board to nullify the election on the grounds {hat the chairman did not use ordinary care in issuing the voting papers; that in consequence a number of persons not qualified received voting papers, and the petitioners believed that more than one voting paper was used by the same person, that 12 voting papers were not included in the ballot, because the name of Mr. .Turner, who was not a candidate, was entered upon them in error, and other candidates on those papes were deprived of those votes. The petitioners were strongly of opinion that in consequence of these irregularities the result of the election was materially affected. The petition was signed by Win.. Leys, John Swales. J. A. Campbell, and eight others. It was ac- 1 companied by certified statement. J. W. Swales said ho sat between two young men about 20 years of age, who received voting papers, and exercised the vote after acknowledging to each other that they were not qualified Voters. John Swales testified that a resident of Victoria-street West admitted to him that he exercised a voting paper at the meeting. A. E. Manning, of St. Mary's Road, said that a voter had assured him that he had voted three times. . John Clarke, of Melbourne, who with his'daughter is on a visit, said that he had attended the meeting and received voting papers, which they filled in and placed in the ballot box, although to his regret he now learned they had no legal right to vote at such a meeting, A Wellington resident also received a voting paper and filled it up it the Ponsonby meeting., Clara E. Arch stated'that she was sitting beside a boy and two girls belonging to one family who each had voting papers which they filled in and put into the ballot box. Mr. W..Leys, the chairman of the late committee, stated his reasons why the election should be upset. When the chairman gave out the voting papers he did not explain who wore entitled to vote and so far as he could observe gave to all present a ballot paper, and he was sure that many received and exercised voting papers who had no legal qualification, and he noticed several place more than one ballot paper in the ballot box. J. Turner, John Clark, and J. R. Hanna, scrutineers at the Ponsonby school election, stated that they had examined the voting papers. They found that 13 papers contained the names of persons not candidates, and they were treated as informal, and the names of the nominated caudidates on these papers were not counted in the scrutiny. The Chairman pointed out as a remarkable fact that the objectors were principally defeated candidates, Mr. Parr commented on the evidence in support of the petition as exceedingly flimsy. Mr. Shaw thought those protesting should make the inquiry, and he moved that in the opinion of the committee the election of the Ponsonby School Committee was carried out in accordance with the Act.

Mr. Martin seconded the motion.

Mr. Rees was of opinion that the election was not in accordance with the Act, as the scrutineers threw out 13 papers because Mr. Turner's name was on them, and those depositing those papers were deprived of their lights as voters, rights which, if exercised, might have altered the personnel of the committee. Mr, Kees then proceeded to refer to the cases quoted, and said the points for their consideration were: did the chairman display oulpable negligence in issuing the papers, and was the refusal of those 13 papers of vital importance to the election ? He moved that sufficient evidence had been tendered, to warrant an inquiry by the Board of Education.

This ameudment was not seconded.

Mr, Parr moved as an amendment to Mr. Shaw's motion "That in the opinion of this committee the election, although not strictly in accordance with the Act, was of such substantial compliance with its requirements as to be valid."

Mr. Shaw adhered to his motion, and Messrs, Ralph, Mundy, and other members spoke in support of it. The amendment was lost on the voices, and Mr. Shaw's motion was carried.