CHARGE NOT PROVED

Otago Daily Times, Issue 20743, 14 June 1929, Page 9

CHARGE NOT PROVED

MALPRACTICE AT BY-ELECTION. i FINDING OF COMMISSIONER. (United Press Association.) (By Electrlo Telegraph—Copyright.) SYDNEY, June 13. The findings of the Royal Commissioner on the charges made by Mr Lang (Leader of the Opposition) of malpractices in the Parramatta by-election were considered by the Cabinet. The report states that the charges against a prominent Nationalist of having dishonestly attempted to obtain votes had net been proved. The allegations which the commissioner had to inquire into were as follow: (1) That the roll on which the vote was taken was in a deplorable state, that it was in such a condition that some persons had been guilty of malpractice. (2) That hundreds of persons were upon that roll whose' names should not have been there, and that most of them voted. (3) That a prominent Nationalist who was actively connected with the election was responsible for this result. (4) That this prominent Nationalist dishonestly endeavoured to obtain votes. (5) 'That he deliberately broke the law by inducing at least two electors to make a false statement in their application for a postal vote. (6) That there are on the roll for the Parramatta district hundreds of names of people who are either dead or have left the district for years, and the records of the voting at the said by-election show that someone in their name took part in the ballot, and that these people who are dead or absent for years from the electorate voted. (7) That a prominent Nationalist induced or endeavoured to induce two residents (man and wife) of Herbert street, Long Bay, who had four years previously ceased to reside in the Parramatta district, fraudulently to apply for postal votes at the said by-election, and to make a false declaration to obtain such postal votes. (8) That the said two residents did vote at the said by-election, or some persons voted for them. (9) That votes were admitted by the returning officer at Pennant Hills West guaranteed merely on a policeman’s receipt. (10) That votes were admitted by the returning officer although they were claimed on schedule forms dated 1925, which were used in connection with the Cumberland electorate, which docs not exist now.