WESTERN MAORI ELECTORATE

Timaru Herald, Volume XCVIII, Issue 18063, 8 March 1923, Page 7

WESTERN MAORI ELECTORATE

DR FOMARE CITED HOST OF ALLEGATIONS. CHARGES OF BRIBERY AND CORRUPTION. PRESS ASSOCIATION. / TAURANGA, Wednesday. : The hearing of the election petition against the return of Dr. Pomare, for the Western Maori electoral district, was commenced to-day, before Justices Hosking and Stringer. Mr Skerrett, K.C., and Mr Levi, , Wellington, appeared for the petitioner, Kanapu Haeruke, of AVanganui, and Mr Myers, K.C., and Mr O’Leary, AVelliugton, for Dr. Pomare (Sir Maui Pomare). Thirteen specific cases of bribery, corruption, and illegal practices are alleged, and irregularities, improprieties and failures to comply with the Legislature Act in the taking of the poll are also alleged. The allegations of bribery and corruption are:

(1) That Dr. Pomare directly or indirectly gave to Tamaiwhina Rawlri, of Thames, £27 or thereabouts with a view to influencing Dr. Pomare’s return. (2) That Dr. Pomare, through Kolii Taukiwaho gave one Teirikia, at Tauranga, a bottle of beer to induce him to vote for Dr. Pomare. (3) That Dr. Pomare, or Frank Perkins, storekeeper,; Pukelcohe, was responsible for providing meat, drjnk and entertainment for the electors. (4) That Dr. Pomare himself, or by others, caused drink to be provided at the Star Hotel, Tauranga, for electors. v (5) That Dr. Pomare, on or about November 19, at the meeting at Matapihi, near Tauranga, promised to secure the reinstatement of persons present, who had previously been employed on the railway works. (6) That shortly before the election Dr. Pomare, directly or indirectly, procured the reinstatement of certain electors on the railway works.

(7) That at Muir’s goldmine, near Tepuke, on or about November 20, Dr. Pomare, or his agent, committed corrupt practices, treating, bribery and undue influence to induce certain persons to vote for him. (3) That Dr. Pomare, at various places in Taranaki, himself or through others, sh&rtly before the election, threatened as Native Minister to inflict injury, damage, harm or loss on certain electors by excluding. them from the list of beneficial native owners of native lands known as Molcia and Hapotalci, vested in the Public Trustee under the West Coast Settlement Reserves Act then under treaty for sale to the Crown, and • from participation in the purchase money unless they voted for him. (9) That on or about November 4 Dr. Pomare at Manaia offered, or promised, that, certain electors should be relieved from the payment of county rates, or that the enforcement of payment would be considerably delayed. (10) That Dr. Pomare, on or about December 15, paid £5, or some other sum, to Ralpji Grant, of Papakura, for the hire of a motor car for the conveyance ol electors to the poll. (11) That in December, Dr. Pomare paid £5, or some other sum, to R. Burgess, of Papakura, for the hire of a motor car for the conveyance of electors to the poll.

(12) That on or about August 18 Dr. Pofliare offered £2, or some other sum, to Rangi Marumaru. to induce him to vote for Dr. Pontare. (13) That on or about August IS Dr. Pomare himself, or through other persons, threatened to endeavour to procure the cancellation of the native interpreter’s license held by Rang! Marumaru. Petitioner claims, alternately, that if these alleged corrupt practices did not constitute corrupt practices, then Dr. Pomare was guilty of illegal practices. The irregularities, improprieties and failures alleged are:— (a) (That the Deputy Returning Officer's associates were in many cases active parties of Dr. Pomare, and interfered with voters in the booths, and before, and on the day of the election canvassed for votes for Dr. Pomare. (b) That in certain cases the name Written on the voting paper was not the name of the candidate the elector desired to vote for. (b) That liquor was supplied to the electors on the day of the election, particularly all day at the Star Hotel, Tauranga, and in the shed adjoining the polling booth, Bell Block. (d) That in some cases the associate and Deputy Returning Officer wrote the name of the candidate on the voting paper, and in many cases the voting paper was not initialled as required. (e) That at Pukekoho, on election day, free food and drink were supplied bo electors presumed to he voting for Dr. Pomare. (f) That many cases of double voting occurred. (g) That the Governor, acting under Dr. Pomare’s advice as Native Minister, failed to appoint polling booths at several places where they were reasonably required, although such appointments were recommended. ■ Finally it is alleged that such general undue influence. Intimidation, misrepresentation and irregularities prevailed during anyl prior to the election as to render the election void.

MR SKERRETT’S ADDRESS. The courtroom was thronged with large gathering of Maoris, from ail parts of the extensive electorate. All the witnesses were ordered from the Court, except Mr Conway, Dr. Pomare’s private secretary. Mr Skerrefct, in his opening address, pointed out that there were four candidates lor the Western Maori scat, hut- I the contest resolved itself between Dr. Pomare and Katana, the former securing 3835 votes and the latter 3037, and the other two 910 between then.. The electorate was a very extensive one and there were 179 polling booths. I The wholo object of Dr. Pomaro was to detach the supporters of Katana. Counsel dealt first with the charges of securing the re-mnploymeut of Maoris at Matapihi, and quoted telegrams between Dr. Poinnro and the Hon. J. G. Coates to show that Dr. Pomare used his influence in the matter, the ! result being that the men. were rebi- i stated. Evidence would also be ml- - duccd to show that Dr. Pomare threatened to send certain dishonoured cheques to the right quarter, unless Rangi Marumaru supported him, with a view tliai his native interpreter’s, license would bp cancelled. It was also i alleged, and would he shown. that I drink was snppli ><l i the unlives al: | ihe Muir "Mine. T"puko, when Dr. Pomare was there. The result was j

that many became intoxicated, and one of the oldest natives then declared that all would support Dr. Pomare. .Regarding the charge that a bottle of beer had been given to Kolii Taukiwai at Tauranga, it would bo shown that Kohi was a prohibited person, and that the act was not an isolated one, but characteristic of the system adopted by Dr. Pomare of canvassing for votes,, and the charge of supplying liquor at the Star Hotel, Tauranga, on election day, when the Act provided that Natives must not he supplied that day, was in the same direction. With regard to the general charges of irregularities, Mr Skerrett continued, evidence would be called dealing with isolated cases in connection with the election.

WITNESSES’ NARRATIONS. The first witness called was Ngahuia Ngatai, a Native rvoman living at Matapihi near Tauranga, who was present at the meeting when the matter regarding employment was discussed. She said that Dr. Pomare had telegrams, and explained what had passed between him and the Hon. J. G. Coates and also promised that if the hoys voted for him lie would have them reinstated.

To Mr Mvors, witness stated that she was a follower of Rat-ana, senr., and was, at present at his pa on Tauranga harbour. She had not heard the matter of the evidence to be given discussed at anv meeting, certainly not at religious meetings. ‘"She was at Ratana, near Turakina, at Christmas, but the matter of the evidence was not discussed there as far ns she know. Further evidence was given by Ta-kani-a-Tamatea regarding tho meeting held at Matapihi on Sunday, November 19, when Dr. Pbniaro is alleged to have promised that if supported be would have "tho hoys back in their jobs.” Witness said that Dr. Pomare threatened if returned he would punish those who had opposed him. Cross-examined by Mr O’Leary, witness said about forty or fifty were present, and when Dr. Pomaro gathered that some supporters of Ratana were present ho made the threat. - Pou Ngatai, the next witness, was examined at considerable length on the same lines, in cross-examination admitting making a statement to petitioner and Iris solicitors, but denied making another statement later to Mr Bloomfield, solicitor. Auckland, Dr. Pomaro, and a Native interpretei’, and he swore that the .signatures to the three-pago statement produced by Mr Myers were not liis.

, Finally the witness was ordered to stand down, the .Judges remarking that not much credence could he given to Ills evidence, and that it was not much use to either side. This witness also gave evidence regarding thie bottle of beer alleged to have been given to one Teirikn, of Mataphi. He said 'that he got three bottles of boor, but ho could not say where it was got. It was taken to a house at Matapihi, Where it was drunk by several Natives. Teirikia camo in, stood up, and said: “One candidate ton horse-power, and other three, and all better vote for ten horse-power man (Dr. Pomare). Ivoro Aperaliama, of Thames, was called to give evidence of treating there on polling clay in support of the general allegation of undue influence, etc., throughout the district-. There was considerable discussion between the Bench and counsel as to the admissibility of the- evidence, and it was finally decided to postpone further discussion till the Court lhct in Auckland. The witness therefore stood clown in the meantime. Rangi Marumaru gave evidence that ho was a licensed interpreter living at Katana. He wont to ’Wellington from Auckland in consequence of messages that Dr. Pomare wanted to see him. On arrival ho saw Dr. Pomare, who held several, dishonoured cheques of the witness, and he threatened to send them to the proper quarter with a view to having witness’s license cancelled unless h'o supported Dr. Pomare. On leaving witness received £2 from Dr. Pomare. for which ho gave a. receipt. He admitted that it seemed strange that any man giving a bribe should take a receipt. Witness swore that after leaving Wellington the only letter to Dr. Pomare was cue written in September, informing Dr. Pomare that ho would not support him, and Dr. Pomare could do what he liked with the cheques. Later the witness admitted that a letter dated August. 24 to Dr. Pomare was written by him. promising Dr. Pomare his support, and naming a committee to work the electorate for Dr. Pomare. Witness was still under severe crossexamination by Mr Myers when the Court adjourned till 9.30 n.m. tomorrow. awoec.