Election Petitions.

Colonist, Volume XL, Issue 8789, 12 February 1897, Page 2

Election Petitions.

Wellington Suburbs Election. Wellington, February 11. Mr Skerrett briefly went over the evidenoe of bribery, Bnd contended that there was nothing to. support the allegation. Surely a man bad a right to pay hia ju.t debts, and in no eleotion case had it ever been beld that this was bribery. The reason of the delay was that Mr Wilford knew nothing abont them till this eleotion came on. Ooe witness bad never troubled to put in a olaim before. As to Standen, who was alleged to be a paid canvasser, there was no evidence that he was paid or oontraoted to be paid. Mr Chapman, for the petitioner, said the main poiot waa Wilford's letter to the Premier re Mulvaney, whioh oould bear but one oonstruotion. He contended that Mulvaney agreed to support Wilford at the interview ihey had in tbe Supreme Oourt, and there waß distinct evidenoe that a oorrupt bargain waa made then and there. Tbe wit* nessea contradicting Mulvaney were Btill politically exoited, and his evidence was corroborated on the main points by the respondent's witness. After getting the letter, he was a Government supporter. Wilford's attitude ia the witness box, after the letter was read, was very different to what it was before, and he had to admit tbat Mulvaney must have told him he was a supporter, or something to that effeot. It was not neoeßsary tbat a regular bargain ehould bs proved to bring a promise nader tbe Act. . Later. Mr Chapman resumed his addre.s, submitting that GtbbB 1 oase was oee of oorrupt payments to Lindsay, and others were corrupt even if legally incurred, tbis oontention beiog supported by some English oases quoted by counsel for tbe respondent. BJThe Chief Justice, in giving judgment, said that [although suspicion was attaohed to all the charges, on'y one was proved, namely, that relating to Mulvaney. He was satisfied trom the latter' s evidence (apart altogether fromlthat part whioh dil not aooord with Stanien's, and Wilford's). tbat Wilford's aotion in giving the letter to Mulvaney was with the intent to influenoe hia vote. Be the point raised of itß b. iag a sympathetic action, hiß Honor pointed out the purely political nature of the letter. The oireumstanees re Gabbs' let'er was quite different, and in the nature of a referenoe. Standen was shown by the evidenoe never to have said directly that he was engaged on payment, and tha other evidenoe on this point waß of no weight. The payments of various moneys to persons named was not proved to bave been done witb the] intention to influence the eleotors. All the payees were aotive supporters of Wilford. He deolared the eleotion void. Mr Justice Conolly eonoorred with tha Chief Justice. Coonsel for the petitior c 'B applied for oosts, and counsel for respondent obj c ted on the

»-»— »i i ■ mi ' ' " r ■ ' ■■■'-——■ «M-___nr. -«M-«-a->_M___--_---a«_-__-__-___-_______-_-»_--n_-_ prourds that the pet-tenors wera impeoanions and had found no security. The Bench deoided tbat, principally owing to the failure of all the oharges except one, each side should pay his own oosts. Counsel for the respondent claimed indemnity under the Aot, Bee 39, for Mr Wi'ford as witness, wbioh the Bench granted.