Raglan Election Case SIXTY OF PETITIONER’S OBJECTIONS ARE UPHELD; RESPONDENT THIRTY-FOUR

Wanganui Chronicle, 10 May 1947, Page 5

Raglan Election Case SIXTY OF PETITIONER’S OBJECTIONS ARE UPHELD; RESPONDENT THIRTY-FOUR

31 FOR COURT TO DECIDE; 21 JOHNSTOE; 10 BAXTER

(Press Association) HAMILTON. May 9 After four weeks, or 19 sitting days, the Electoral Court, at 5 p.m. to-day. concluded the hearing of ibe petition by Hallyburton Johnstone (National) risking the court to declare him elected for Raglan instead of A. C. Baxter (Labour).

The silling has by far outlasted any previous Electoral Court fixture in New Zealand and the judges have a formidable task to perform before judgment is delivered.

Legal argument has occupied the court since shortly after noon on Tuesday. Mr. T. P. Cleary, for the respondent, addressed the court for approximately nine hours, and Mr. W. J. Sim, K.C.. required only slighter longer time to present his submissions. The court comprises lhe Chief Justice (Sir Humphrey O'Leary) and Sir Archibald Blair.

Although any summary oi lhe fate oi tne objections by both, sides is difficult because of lhe complicated system of categories and classifications followed by counsel during the hearing and in making their suomissions, it is possible to assess tiie fortunes of the petitioner and lhe respondent in regard to their objections on the grounds of residence, lineage, alienage and infancy. In these groups the following figures, although not official, are approximately correct: Objections Proved and Admitted— Petitioner 60, respondent 34. (Four names are common to both lists).

Admitted to Have Failed.—Petitioner 22, respondent 17. Still Undecided.- Petitioner 21, respondent 10. These figures do not embrace the large number of objections by both sides to postal and absentee votes, or to a small group of declaration votes which have been challenged. The position in regard to these 'latter groups is more obscure until the Court delivers judgment, but it is evident that from the classes of objections summarised nearly 100 votes will have to be scrutinised by the Court. (At the election Mr. Baxter was declared electejl with a majority of 39. A magisterial recount, however, reduced this majority to 33). CERTIFICATE OF INDEMNITY. Mr. Sim to-day made a formal application for a certificate of indemnity. The Chief Justice said that the certificate would be issued automatically, although in this case it appeared scarcely necessary, as no voter had wilfully infringed the electoral law, and he thought no question of a prosecution was likely to arise. Before the Court adjourned sine die, the Chief Justice said the first task of the Court would be to consider those votes still in dispute 111 order to decide which votes would be subject to scrutiny. The scrutiny would then be made and the result could be made known shortly afterwards, but many legal questions would be involved and judgment would have to be carefully considered and prepared. Sir Humphrey O'Leary said the Court would remain in Hamilton if at all possible, long enough to deliver judgment here. He hoped the judgment could be given by next Wednesday, but there was a possioility the judgment might have to be delivered in Wellington instead of Hamilton. Argument as to costs could be heard after the judgment was delivered. COURT GIVES RULINGS ON SOME VOTES. When the Court sat this morning Sir Humphrey O’Leary said the disputed votes of two members of the J

Force, John Vivian Phillips and Laurence Joseph Phillip::,, v.ould oe allowed, as it was considered a section of the Electoral Amendment Act, 1940, was intended to meet such circumstances as had been revealed. Concerning the enrolment of these two voters, petitioner's challenges against them would therefore fail. Tiie Chief Justice said, however, that in the case of Elmer Nevil McGill. who was in the merchant service some years before joining the R.A.F., the Court held that his place of residence before service was not in Raglan. Petitioner’s objections to his vole and the vote of Mrs. McGill, whom he married in England, therefore had been proved. Some clarification of the 'score sheet" in regard to the challenge by botli sides against voters alleged to have predominantly Maori blood wu given by the Court. Of the petitioner's original 19 objections in this group, one was withdrawn as the elector did not vote, one was common to both lists, and eight were acknowledged by Mr. Cleary to have been proved. Mr. Sim to-day acknowledged that another eight of these cases had tailed, including seven which depended on the lineage of the Berryman family, about whom lengthy evidence was heard. Mr. Sim said he considered it would be wasting his time to attempt to convince the Court that the Berrymans were more than half-caste Maoris. The last case in the group Mr. Sim claimed had been proved. Ot respondent's seven cases against alleged Maoris, one was common to both lists, one was abandoned, and Mr. Sim today agreed that, as Mr. Cleary had claimed, the respondent’s other flve cases had been proved. • ABSENTEE VOTES. This afternoon Mr. Sim, making submissions as to absentee votes, admitted proof h'l not been furnished in any of the five cases on the petitioner's list concerned with the difference between signatures under singla and married names of women electors. Mr. Sim said proof was acknowledged in all ten of the petitioner’s objections against declarations unsigned by « deputy returning officer. Two of the names were common to both lists, respondent having eight objections in lite same group and all but one of them were conceded by Mr. Sim to have been proved. Of six challenged on the grounds of alleged disparity of signatures, Mr. Sim said four were abandoned, another was not conceded to have failed, but tiie sixth objection was claimed proved. Mr. Sim made detailed submissions concerning other groups of defective absentee votes Discussing postal votes, Mr. Sim conceded that all seven objections against tiie signatures of married women had failed (six were abandoned during the hearing). Of the other eight cases of alleged lack of correspondence of signatures, Mr. Sim conceded that six had failed. One objection to an undated postal declaration was also abandoned, said Mr. Sim. He said two declaration votes challenged by the petitioner and one challenged by the respondent should be allowed, as these persons had been struck off the roll through no fault of their own.