The Ohinemuri Petition.
DBOISIOX, UESSEJRiVEID UNTIL
itIAiRCH Ist
(j*er- United Preas Association.)
V<AlHir, February v
Mr Sketfrett for petitioners, contended it was the. duty -af the retaining officer to provide for due secrecy, aitid eveay piwision «s flagrantly and substantially violated during times when a greater number if votes were being recorded. The ele-.-tion to be valid must "he oarried" O'u. as provided by the fAct, and if ther? was noi vailid^elfiKitipn there, could by no-result. He went at lensrth into .th* law and into tin© facts adduced, paiftiouilarl|y on the: question of secrecy, and objected, to the reflections c«sf on OonsteMe Drisicoll, who did no 1': wo.iit to icriv© evidence at all.
Decision was reseirved till March 1
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/THS19090205.2.23
Bibliographic details
Thames Star, Volume XLV, Issue 10633, 5 February 1909, Page 2
Word Count
119The Ohinemuri Petition. Thames Star, Volume XLV, Issue 10633, 5 February 1909, Page 2
Using This Item
Stuff Ltd is the copyright owner for the Thames Star. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons BY-NC-SA 3.0 New Zealand licence. This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Stuff Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.