BREACHES OF ELECTORAL ACT.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXVII, Issue 11432, 24 July 1900, Page 3

BREACHES OF ELECTORAL ACT.

MARGES ': i AGAINST h TEMPERANCE ;•■ ' CANVASSERS. •? , ';V . , I ILLEGALLY WITNESSING fiIGNATUBES. TWO CONVICTIONS. Mr. H. W. Brabant, S.M., three charges were la.d against Frederick Muffins, for having witnessed signatures to claims for enrolment under the Electoral Act, without having seen such signatures written. The Crown Prosecutor (Hon. J. A. Tole) appeared for the prosecution, instructed by the Registrar of Electors (Mr. John King) Mr-J. R. Reed appeared for the defe* shnnwlrt i that hvo of the informations Should be withdrawn, and Mr. Reed then h re? tjf", ° f , t0 the remain charge Defendant, ho said, was collecting he Co iirr 7° m^', aml in , the <» SS the Court, had called at a house to have a claim signed by a domestic servant. As tho girl was too busy to come to the door, he sent ho form in to her, and her mistress who brought back to him. gavo her .France that it was the girl's signature Mr. Reed hoped H., Worship would take a lenient new of the cose, and would not inflict a heavy punishment for what was merely an indiscreet act. ' Mr Tole said the Legislature considered the oirer.ee a serious one, and had provided a penalty ° r £s °- Tho defendant was on of the class of canvassers who obtained signatures by hundreds, and if an offence of this nature was passed over lightly the door would be ned to all manner of abuses, I he investigation and examination of those claims had disorganised the work of the whnlo police force, and the Registrar's staff kind ,t ™%" 0t th ,° ?,' VnmaiSm of the Kind. The Bench had already warned people as to the serious nature of the offence. Mr. Reed denied that Mullins was a mid canvasser. J

Mr. Tole said he was canvassing in the prohibiten interest he had no ri-rht to do canvassing m such a wholesale fashion. The sooner canvassers' attention was called to the provisions of the Act the better. He asked tor a substantial penalty. His Worship said the offence did not seem to be a very serious one. but as the Legislature provided such a hidi penalty for the offence, lie would fine defendant £2 and costs. William Richardson, the well-known nro♦ibition orator was Mso charged with a breach of the Electoral Act by signing his name as witness to an application for enrolment made by one Margaret June Brady, without having seen the applicant sign her name. Defendant nleadod not guilty, and was undefended, while the Crown ProserulVT/ A A - To,p) conducted the case on behalf of the Registrar of Electors. Mr. Tole said the. case was a simple one; evidence would bo brought to show that defendant had witnessed the signature of the claimant without living se«< her sign. John King. Registrar of Electors for the City of Auckland electoral district stated that toward the end of March, ho received the application for enrolment (produced), which ,vas signed hv Margaret Jane Brady and was witnessed bv the defendant, whose' signature he identified. Witness went on to say that defendant had witnessed a largo number of claims for enrolment, and made some remark which defendant did not catch' Whereupon, the defendant addressed the witness and requested Mm in a rude tone to turn round so that his evidence might bo heard.

Hi* Worship said witness was doing right in addressing the Court, and calmly advised Mr. Richardson to take un a position from which ho could better hear what was said. Cross-examined: Witness said it was his duty to compile a full and complete roll of the electors. Defendant : Did you supply to the citizens such a full and complete roll? Witness: Unquestionably. Witness denied that he was bombarded on election day by electors whoso names had been wrongfully omitted. Defendant then went on to cross-examine witness about claims for enrolment, which had boon rejected, and upon other electoral matters, until the Magistrate had to request him to confine himself to the charge' before the Court. Tlio defendant continued to treat the Court to a few specimens of firebcll oratory. Ho asserted that the • case against him was a political prosecution. Mr. Tolo gave this statement a flat denial, and the Magistrate said he did not wish the Court turned into a political meeting. Defendant: From what you have had to do with me, do you not think I was actuated by public spirit and acted in the interests of the citizens of Auckland? Witness: I very much doubt it, I always treated you with courtesy, but you showed a great amount of personal feeling against me. Defendant: That is not an answer to my question. What is your opinion as to my motive?

Witness said defendant's whole desire seemed to be to concentrate on the Auckland roll everyone, whether eligible or not, and whether they belonged to the city or not. Defendant: I want your opinion whether I was acting in the public interest? His Worship: By acting illegally you could not be acting in the public interest'. .Defendant: Tt has to he proved that I acted illegally. I want Your Worship to understand that this prosecution is a bluff," directed at me, because I have been the means of getting on the roll thousands who were illegally and scandalously disfranchised.

His Worship: I must stop your cross-ex-amination if you talk like that. I cannot have this Court turned into a political meeting. Mr. Tole: Mr. Richardson thinks ho is at the firebell.

Defendant: No. he doesn't.

Margaret Jane Firstly, residing in Lincolnstreet, I'onsonby, then gave evidence. She identified the signature on tho amplication for enrolment as her own, but said it was

not signed in the presence of the defendant, whom she had never seen before. Someone called to have her sign the claim, and had waited at toe door while her daughter brought it inside for he. to sign. The defendant then gave evidonco on his own behalf, and admitted that the signature on the application was his. Ho had no recollection of ever having been in Lincoln-street, nor of ever having witnessed any claim which ho had not seen signed by the applicant. He declared the charge had been trumped up asrainst him from political motives. He thought the application must be an uncompleted claim, which had, through inadvertence, gone in with the other claims.

At this stage the defendant asked for an adjournment, in order that Mrs. Biady's dnirjMer might bo called as ft witness. Mr. Tole said there was no need to call her. Defendant said he wanted to have justice done to him.

This was followed by a burst of applause from tilt back of the Court, and the police caught cue man in the act of applauding and brought him before the Bench. His Worship (to defendant): One of your political supporters? .Defendant:. I don't know. You have no right to say that to me. I am fighting a political battle. I knowMr. Tole protested asrainst the suggestion the* politic had anything tc do with tho case. Mr. King had brought the charge on his own initiative and in pursuance, of his statutory authority, and without any instructions from any higher official. He asked His Worship to make a. substantial difference between the present case and that of tho last, defendant who had manfully acknowledged bis error, and more especially as Richardson had on his oath assorted that a false charge had been laid, when five-sixths of the form was in his handwriting. It was a piece of impudence on his purl to act as he had done, transgressing every privilege and behaving most disrospeetlullv to tho Court. His Worship said he did not think it necessary to got tho evidence of the daughter. He thought defendant had sufficient education, ability, and experience to understand that he should behave in a Court of justice in a different way from wdiat ho had (lone. Ho had tried to turn the Court into a political meeting, bj imputing improper conduct to the Registrar of Electors, and by dragging in matters which had nothing tc do with the case. The evidence appeared strong enough to convict on. although it was quite possible the claim might have been put in accidentally. Defendant was fined £5, and costs. John Roach, the man who was caught applauding Richardson's remarks, was then charged with wilfully interrupting the proceedings of tho Court, and pleaded guilty, adding that ho was only one of a- crowd. His Worship: That ii, true. But yon .surely have sufficient education to know that yon have no right to net in Ftmli a way. You are liable tr. a fine, or imprisonment. However, I think the ends of justice will be mot if I discharge you with a caution on thi. occasion, ■'■••-.