TRAMWAYS CAMPAIGN

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LII, Issue 17153, 1 October 1926, Page 12

TRAMWAYS CAMPAIGN

THE POLE DISPUTED. 1 IiREG CLARITIES ALLEG ED.' NOTICE IN BOOTH. The petition asking for an enquiry I into the poll taken last month on the tramways issue has now been lodged, and the Magistrate, Mr. E. C. Levvey, S.M., will conduct the enquiry tomorrow week. The petition alleges that there were a number of irregularities in connection with Hu', taking of the poll, and that these irregularities were sullieienl to reader the poll invalid. Ju brief, the petitioners say that the voters were confused us to the issue, and that the votes, as counted, do not: represent the true wishes of the ratepayers roneorning the continuance or discontinuance 'of the tramways service. 'That the voting-paper used at. the poll was not drawn up in compliance with the “Local Elections and Polls; Amendment Act, 192(5,” and that votes recorded by means of a cross on the paper, and allowed by the returning otlicer, were null and void; that some voters adopted the practice of striking out one of the lines on the voting paper and placing a cross against the other, this being confusing and not according to law; that the voting paper itself was drawn up in a manner confusing to the, voters, some j of whom had recorded their votes er-i roneously; that advertisements pub-j lished prior to and on the day of the poll instructed ratepayers how to vote, and had contributed to the uncertainly of the ratepayers, are some of Iho allegations on which the peliDonors seek lo upset Iho poll. I>OE LI NCI BOOT IT I > 111 ROTH )N. The petit ion also states I licit voters were further confused by the action of a poll clerk, one Horace Kirk, who displayed at the ..Masonic Hall polling booth tin instruction to voters as to how to record their intentions, and that this notice was incorrect; and if acted upon would cause voters to wrongly record Iheir votes. The notice was in the following form, the petition alleges:— For the proposal To retain the trams Against the proposal To scrap the trams. 'Phe petition proceeds Instate Dial these instructions were on' the return-, ing officer’s table and were seen by persons about to record their votes. The instructions so given were erroneous and if acted upon would cause the voters to record wrongly their votes. That instructions similar to those were also posted up and exhibited at the To Haparn polling booth with similar results (and complaint was made to the returning officer, Mr. H. M. Porter, regarding the written instructions referred to at the To Hapara polling booth), and if acted upon would cause the voters to record their votes wrongly. That ninety-six informal votes were recorded out of a total number of 2052 votes recorded. This indicates that a great number of persons were confused and misled by the various matters before stated. Had the voting paper clearly and concisely defined the issues in question, and had the voters not been misled by advertisements an'd instructions as so! out therein, the informal votes or the greater parti thereof would not, have been recorded, That Thomas Todd, a member of the Gisborne Borough Council, who was strongly ndvocaDng the discontinuance of Din trams, intercepted and interfered with voters on their way lo the polling-booths. lie made every ellort 1o influence them against their intentions as to how to vote. That Thomas E. Toneyc.liffc, a member of the Gisborne Borough Council, who was also advocating the discontinuing of* the trams, made every effort to influence voters how to cast their votes in the Ivaiti polling booth, and was ordered off the premises by one of the polling officers. Tliiit the full requirements of “The Local Elections and Bolls Act, 190 S, ” and ils amomli,neats, and I‘The Tramwavs Act. l!)0.s.” and schedule hereunder. together with all its amen ding Acts, have net been complied with and Die poll is therefore, null and void. The provision in “ The Local Elect ions and Polls Act, BIOS.” and its amendments are framed for a direct vmte on some loan proposal, and ns this proposal was lo revoke an Order-in Council, the terms in the Act were not directly applicable without more explicii detailed instructions than those given. The petitioners say that I hey are dissastislied with the poll and demand an enquiry on the above grounds.