Stratford High School Commitee.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume XLVII, Issue 7831, 25 May 1905, Page 3

Stratford High School Commitee.

election upset. At the meeting: of the Taranaki Education Board on Tuesday, a petition was read from twenty-seven householders „f Stratford (including five members of the present committee and three of the other candl, dates who had stood for election), asking the Hoard to declare the Hhtfi'svh, I r^ 6 Sll ' atford District High School Committee null and void on the following grounds : (1). That the voting papers wore irregularly issued and contrary to the [ Act; the papers were handed to various householders in batches and several persons Oiled in the names on five or six voting papers. (2). That' the result as declared by th o Chairman is not the result as shewn hV the ballot papers. (3). That the ballot papers have, since the election been re-counted by others than the scrutineers appointed by the householders at the meeting. (4). I n face of the above irregularities, and thq fact that the chairman has, since the meeting, stated that three of the candidates tied, and that he had given his casting vote in favour o! one, on tue morning following the election, we would respectfully usk that your Hoard cause a fresh election to bo held." Considerable discussion ensued.

Mr Monkhouso explained the circumstances. He coiiM not Bay- whether ' the irregularities complained of air fected the result or not, but dkl not I th'.nk so. There was no doubl the, election was very loosely conducted. I Mr Adlum moved and Mr Faull seconded "That the Board declares the election of the Stratford High School) Committee null and void." It was argued that a new election would remedy any dissatisfaction which existed. [ Mrs Dougherty was strongly adverse to disturbing the election, as the Committee were doing excellent work. She moved as an amendment, " That, seeing that the action! of the chairman of the householders' meeting in giving his casting vote, did not alter the result of the election, tho Board docs not consider it its duty to upset the election." Mr Maunder seconded.

Upon a .vote being taken, the amendment was lost, and the motion upsetting tho election was carried by a majority of three.