Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

PEFENCE OF THE PROHIBITION PARTY.

* Ily Telegraph.) F'roiu Our Own Correspondent. DL'NEDIN. April KO. Kppl.viiifj to mi urticle in tho Evening SUir, "heckling" the Prohibition people for defeating the Chalmers local option poll petition on a technicality. Mr A s. Ailntus, who conducted the case on behalf <>i" t-he no-licunsa party in liio lower court ainti before the Appeal Court, suys : "1 should like to say a word to you and those to whom you refer a* inclined to regret that tho litigation has been decided in our favour on a technicul p-oint. What I want to say is that while it is contrary to our policy to raise mere technicalities, we have l>een forced to do this for the reason that i\lthough we have again ajvd again appealed to the Government and Parliament t 0 rid our law of the iniquitous absurdities under which our polls ure continually declared void, we have been uniformly refused justice We are convinced that until it is slvown that the aword of legal technicality is two-»(lgod, and will cut tho trade a s welt as temperance party, it is useless to expect remedial legislation. In 1899 Oanuiru and Bruce voted reduction, hut on legal trclinioalitirs. irregularities were held to j have occurred, and the polls were declared void. Representations on the matter have been made to the Government again and again, and dhe temperance party has been promised amendments in the law-, but nothing Ims been done. The. inference is to one's hand ; unless tho trade ure hit wo remain helpless. Very well : we have hit the trade, n n<l in Newtown and Itruce we shall try to do it again. Then we shall get fair play. Suppose we hail waived this point in Chalmers and (jone to a, trial of the petition, what guarantee would we liave that the matter would h&ve been 'fairly considered on its merits' '.' With the experience of Oumuru and Newtown and the two cases in Bruce, it would he difficult to answer the question. This is not n quarrel with the magistrate, but with i'arliuaieut and the law."

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ST19030501.2.11.1

Bibliographic details

Southland Times, Issue 19035, 1 May 1903, Page 2

Word Count
351

PEFENCE OF THE PROHIBITION PARTY. Southland Times, Issue 19035, 1 May 1903, Page 2

PEFENCE OF THE PROHIBITION PARTY. Southland Times, Issue 19035, 1 May 1903, Page 2

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert