THE LYTTELTON SEAT.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXIII, Issue 19275, 13 March 1926, Page 12

THE LYTTELTON SEAT.

i MR. McCOMB'S PETITION.

MANY VOTES IN DISPUTE.

JUDGES SCANNING PAPERS.

DECISION EXPECTED TO-DAY.

[jiY TELEGRAPH. —PRESS ASSOCIATION.] .... CHRISTCHURCH, Friday. The hearing of the petition 01 Mri J. a- McCombs against the return of Mr. M. ■ E. Lyons as member for Lyttelton commenced in the Supreme Court to-day be- - foro Mr. Justice Stringer and Mr. Justice Ostler. Mr. P. J, O'Regan, with Mr. W. j. Hunter, appeared for petitioner, and Mr. A. T. Donnelly, with Mr. R. H. Livingstone, for respondent. ■ The Court was engaged this morning in hearing evidence and argument on the petition and then adjourned to permit of an examination of the ballot papers. Subsequently a second adjournment was made ■ until 10 o'clock to-morrow. In his statement in support of - the petition, Mr. McCombs objected to the votes of fifteen persons qn the ground that they were not entitled to be enrolled as electors, not being resident in the district. He also objected to the votes of six persons whoso names ..had been retained on the Lyttelton roll, although they had lived outside the electorate for three months preceding the closing of the rolls. One vote was / challenged. on the ground that the voter had not resided one year in New Zealand. . : Mr. McCombs claimed as valid tho ' votes' of three persons who had struck out *' it-Mr; Lyons* name, but had made other marks on the face of the ballot paper. > These votes had been disallowed by tho returning officer. Three other votes, re- •• jected by the returning officer because of initials or other marks made on the back • of the ballot paper, were also claimed as - valid. p-u , crosses Claimed as Valid. • . ; Thirty persons had voted by placing a "cross against one name, and 19 of those put tho cross opposite Mr. McComb's name. All these.votes had been disallowed and Mr. McCombs claimed that they were valid. He claimed also the' votes of three absentees disallowed, and , objected to one other 'Which'the returning officer had allowed. Respondent objected to the votes of eight "persons on. the ground that they 'were not British subjects. Ho claimed * :^p^%iie. vote as having been improperlyOpening for petitioner, Mr. O'Regan .laid that'since judgment was given in : 'the' ! Westland petition the issues'bad been considerably simplified and narrowed. Petitioner approached the Court with some - degree of confidence. In practically every r election held in New-Zealand. was- •.. a fringe of vote? that could -bo - ques- ... . tioned,- but this .was, never done when; the margin between the. candidates was ample. At the. magisterial , recount .in . ... connection with tho;Lyttelton election 121 ■A• had - been rejected, 30 .because, of ' v - 'grosses against the : names' of, the icandi' date's. These votes could he classified /as v lollows: —Both names .istrncik' -ottfc, ~-- neither name struck out, 41; cross opposite names, 1; cross' opposite 'McCombs, f' 19; cross opposite Lyons, 11; ballot papers rejected because of something written on . them, 9; • - •> ■ ' Bollmn in Dispute. informal votes were conv "'fiierned their Honors had to deal' With 30 r wfiich-'the' electors were clearly • en"titled to ,vote. Of these 19 .votes', .were •jmarked with a cross against.the nJiiile of : ■ ' Mr. McC&tnbß, and 11 with a cross, against * the nctAio of Mr. Lyons. It was the for- •" .tunes of war,; but if the votes had been ,-V allowed at the recount Mr. McCombs. " would have been elected by two votes. -* Cflunsel j3aid petitioner' was -also object"7. . ing -.tfcvthe votes of IS persons who were ».f, riiot* entitled to bo on the roll. ir Bided lit other electorates and voted "in Lytteftch, : ~and he would ask; that thenvotes ba disallowed. • Evidence wis called by _ Mr. O'Regan to prove the contentions raised about the place of residence of voters, .. The . points ,-Mil dispute w;er.e place of : residence, permanence or otherwise of residence outsido . the electorate, and details. concerning aprV! plications for absent voters' permits. Two of Mr.- McCombs' objections con•'"cerned probationer nurses who had voted j n tho Lyttelton - electorate where their '"' parents resided. It was claimed they :""mnst vote, in Cliristchttrch South, where fi® •' the hospital Was situated. One vote had •'* "luck"'? Written across it.. Mr. O'Regan ;-'iclauhed .that as a vote with "too Irish * c 7:written.on it had been allowed in the '■v Westiand case this vote must bo allowed (]:■- in Lyttelton. The Court adjourned at-12.25 to allow of the. voting papers being examined. It . .was intended to resume at. .4. p.m., but V l ' later on'an adjournment until to-morrow 5 Was announced, when' judgment will prob- <:• "6bly- be given. .. .'