THE DAIRY POOL.

Waipa Post, Volume XXIV, Issue 1419, 23 October 1923, Page 5

THE DAIRY POOL.

RESULT OF THE REFERENDUM. MANY DID NOT VOTE. (By Telegraph. Press Association.) WELLINGTON, Monday. The counting of votes on the referendum of dairy produce suppliers as to whether the Dairy Export Control Ael would come into operation or not was completed last night. The final returns are: For the Act 22,284 Against 9255 Informal and duplicated ' 229 Total votes polled .. . 31,768 Total on roll 56,000 Number not voting . . 24,232 It will be seen tihat the number who did not record their votes exceeded the number of votes in favour of the Act. Mr F. H. Leonard, of Auckland, and Mr C. E. Maxwell, of Taranaki, who acted as scrutineers for the opponents of the Dairy Produce Control Act, pay a high tribute to the courtesy and efficiency of the staff of the electoral office. The system employed in handling the large number of envelopes and the method of opening, sorting, and recording the votes, they say, would have satisfied the most exacting critics. The chief electoral officer, Mr Hodgkins, in addition to superintending the whole of the other work, afforded every possible facility to the scrutineers for the discharge of their duties.

Commenting upon the majority recorded in favour of the Act, the scrutineers explain that the envelopes as they were received at the electoral office were sorted and placed in boxes. The boxes were opened in rotation, the earlier votes showing approximately a proportion of five to one in favour of the proposal, while the later arrivals reduced the proportion to about three to one. This shows, the scrutineers think, that the persons who had views in support of the Act posted their ballot papers early. The doubtful voters, they hold, were swayed by the fuller information supplied by "the opponents of the measure. Messrs Leonard and Maxwell contend that if more time had been available for the distribution of well-con-sidered information the voting would have been much closer. The ballot was singularly free from informal votes, and a considerable number of ballot papers wei'a ■ returned with the explanation that duplicates had been received and had not been used. The scrutineers maintain that the ballot has been of great educational value to those engaged in the dairy industry. They anticipate that an' increasing number of producers will take a live, intelligent interest in the industry, and their own business, and so be better qualified to deal with the complex problems they will have to face in the not far distant future.