TE AROHA ELECTION ENQUIRY.

New Zealand Times, Volume LII, Issue 9274, 21 April 1891, Page 2 (Supplement)

TE AROHA ELECTION ENQUIRY.

THE ELECTION DECLARED VOID.

Auckland, April 3.

In the trial of tho Te Aroha election petition evidence was given by Thomas Charles Hammond that he hod acted as secretary to Mr Allen’s committee at Cambridge, and had been paid L 4 a week. He had not canvassed for votes. To-day, after the address of counsel, the Chief Justice delivered judgment. He said that the consent of Mr Allen to be nominated was beyond question, but the petitioner asserted that the consent was nut given in the inode prescribed by the Act. The returning officer did receive a telegram from Wakapuaka which was despatched by a New Zealand officer, who repeated it from a message which he received. The Act did not provide that the consent might be only by ordinary telegram ; it might be by letter They were satisfied, therefore, that there had been consent within the meaning of the Act. The evidence as to the alleged bribery was not clear ; but as to Hammond’s case nothing could be clearer than that it was an illegal practice to employ agents. It was clear that Hammond had been appointed to represent Mr Allen as a paid agent, and as that was an illegal practice, it rendered Mr Allen’s election void, and so they would report to tho Sneaker. Aa, however, several cases of bribery and corrupt practices had been alleged by the petitioner and had not been proved, they ordered that each party should pay his own costs.

Mr Cooper quoted section 4 of the Amendment Act of 1884, and asked that Mr Allen should not be incapacitated under that section from standing for election within three years. The Chief Justice said they would consider that point when making their report.

The Court, acting under section 39, gave indemnities to witnesses to relieve them of the liability to prosecution in regard to any statements they had made in their evidence.