ELECTION ROLLS

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXV, Issue 23018, 21 April 1938, Page 12

ELECTION ROLLS

MANY NAMES OMITTED FAULTY CLAIMS MADE A number of citizens who entrusted the placing of their names on the city municipal roll to canvassers working on behalf of one or other of the principal organisations interested in the coming eleetidn will find themselves without the right to vote on May 11. For various reasons 50 or more of the applications for enrolment received by the city returning officer, Mr. P. F. Notley, on the day that the supplementary roll closed had to be rejected. These were incomplete in some particular, such as failure to state the address of the applicant, failure to get the applicant to sign the form, or the absence of the signature of a witness. In each case the returning officer advised the applicant that he could not be enrolled. In the process of checking the applications as they were received, it was also discovered that enrolment forms had been forwarded by or on behalf of over 200 persons who were already on the roll. While this displayed carelessness on the part of canvassers or of the and created a lot of unnecessary work for the office staff, it did not affect the interests of the applicants. A further lack of attention on the part of canvassers was revealed in the number of forms filled in and sent to tho city office on behalf of applicants with the right to claim enrolment in suburban boroughs. These application forms were marked with the city date stamp, showing that they were received before the time fixed for the closing of the supplementary roll, and then forwarded to the suburban returning officer concerned. It will resit with these officers to say whether tho applications can be accepted.