LOCAL OPTION PETITIONS.

Timaru Herald, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 11985, 6 February 1903, Page 3

LOCAL OPTION PETITIONS.

THE NEWTOWN ENQUIRY ADJOURNED. ; Per Press Association. WELLINGTON, February 5. The enquiry into the Newtown licensing pod was adjourned to-day until Monday, pending a motion being brought in. the Supreme Court to prevent the Magistrate proceeding with a scrutiny. During a legal discussion, Dr McArthur, S.M., said that in the scrutiny he would most certainly cast- aside the votes of persons who were under age when enrolled, even though they had come of age prior to the issue of the writs. THE POLL AT ASHBURTON UPHELD. ASHBURTON, February 5. The hearing of the petition against the recent local option poll at Ashburton, whereby ho license was carried, was concluded at Ashburton this morning before Mr C. A. Wray, S.M. All the grounds of the petition were abandoned, except those dealing with the alleged over-crowd-ing of two smaller polling booths and the non-simultaneous delivery of local option and electoral voting papers. The former ground was practically abandoned this morning, and legal argument centred round the second. Evidence was given that at two booths the officers handed the voters the local option paper* first and the electors' papers afterwards, although no inconvenience was caused thireby. The Magistrate gave bis decision as follows :—The electors of Ashburton have decided by a substantial majority that no licenses are to be granted in the district, and I am asked to declare the poll void

on two grounds :—(1) That over-crowd-was allowed at some of the booths, and (2) That voting papers were not given out simultaneously as required by the Act. These objections would come under Subsection 6 of Section 40 of the Act of 1876 as irregularities in an election which tended to defeat its fairness. As to the overcrowding, it is quite evident that though an irregularity was permitted, causing some inconvenience, it in no way affected the result of the election, as no one was thereby prevented from voting. As regards simultaneous voting, I think that the proper course was not followed at Mavfield and Mount Somers. and that each voter should have received his two papers at the same time and retired with both to the compartments. The method adopted was not strictly in accordance with the letter of the statute, but I cannot see that it would make anv difference in the result, nor can I suppose that the result i would have been altered had the proper method been used. It may have been a mistake, but it did not tend to defeat the fairness of the election. It seems to me unreasonable to contend that anv such irregularity, without which no elecrC w;i? Ver f U^ Iy to !* free > ean °™« He expressed. The petition will be dismissed K«IJ? S:S <™ Wed tLe soUcitor for the allowed S ;D ° ° ther COsts t0 be