THE ELECTION PETITIONS.

Pahiatua Herald, Volume XX, Issue 5108, 13 April 1915, Page 7

THE ELECTION PETITIONS.

ARGUMENT CONINUED

Electric Telegraph—Press Association. Wellington, Last Night. The argument on the election petitions was continued this afternoon. On the Full Court resuming after lunch'Mir Skerrett, K.C., opened his case. In reply to Sir John Findlay’s contention thiat the roll was not conclusive he contended that with the exception of sub-section of cause 196 and section 44 of the Legislature Act, it was common ground between himself and his friend that the roll was conclusive as to the right to vote. The effect of his friend’s contention meant that the names odj every person on the roll could be attacked, and that would lead to a great confusion. He did not go so far as to say that a full-blooded Maori being on the European roil bad a right to be there. That did not affect tjie principle be was contending for, but only proved that the registrar had exceeded his duty. The words of section 196 refer to a person being “illegally placed” on the roil, and a person could not be illegally placed on the roll where the Registrar of Electors had adjudicated on his claim. “Illegally” did not refer to the act of the elector, but to the act of some officer who had exceeded his jurisdiction, and placed people on the roll in excess of his powers. It was the act of the registrar and not the act of the voter that the language of the statute aimed at when it referred to persons being illegally placed on the roll. The “Illegally retaining” a name on the roll must also be the act of the registrar in keeping on the roll the name of a person which the Statute declares should Ik 1 struck off. Sections 41 and 45 of the Legislature Act defined the duties of the registrar, which duties were of a judicial nature, and the registrar, acting in a judicial capacity could not be interefered with miles- he has acted beyond his jurisdiction. But even supposing it were competent to appeal against the actions of the registrar that appeal must be made to the Magistrate and not to he Election Court. Mr Skerrett then proceeded to deal with the question of names be “illegally retained” on the roll, citing as eases the names of persons who had not voted and yet were retained on the roll by the registrar. The registrar acted direct violation of the Statute, but it was quite a different matter when a voter was dis- ] qualified from voting because of the , registrar construing, as in Hawke s Bay. a difficult electoral boundary, happens to place him in a wrong district. The Court adjourned till to-morrow.