THE GENERAL ELECTION.

Waikato Times, Volume 99, Issue 16653, 19 November 1925, Page 7

THE GENERAL ELECTION.

THE WESTLAND SEAT. SEDDON AND O'BRIEN EQUAL. CASTING-VOTE FOR SEDDON. (By Telegraph—Special to Times.) HOKITIKA, Wednesday. On the count for the Westland seat, Messrs J. O'Brien (Lab.) and T. E. Y. Seddon (National) hav3 4176 votes each. The casting vote of the. returning officer was in favour of Mr Seddon.

ANOTHER TIE. LYTTELTON ELECTION. R.O. DECIDES FOR MR. LYONS. CBy Telegraph.—Special to Times.') CHRISTCHURCH, Thursday. The returning officer announced the result of the Lytielton election as under:— M. E. Lyons (R.) . . -4900 J. McCombs (Lab.) 4900 He gave his casting vote in favour of Mr. Lyons. A double tie in an election campaign establishes a record so far as New Zealand is concerned. The nearest approach to such an occurence was" in 1893, when Hon. G. W. Bussell defeated Hon. W. Rolleston by one vote. It is practically certain that a recount will be demanded in each case, and ic view of the unsatisfactory position in regard to absentee votes, the possibility of the matter being referred to an Electoral Court with a view to having another poll is being discussed. Such a Court may be set up on a petition from cither candiate, and it is within the power of -.he Court to declare the election void. LABOUR PARTY'S ATTITUDE. PROBABLY DEMAND RECOUNT. WELLINGTON, Thursday. The position of the Labour candidates in the Lyttclton and Westland seals will be considered at a meeting of the national executive of the Labour Party to-morrow morning, when in all probability it will be decided to demand a magisterial recount in both cases. PREMIER NOTHING TO SAY. _______ v DUNEDIN, Thursday. When approached this morning as to the fact thit both the Lyttelton and Westland elections had been decided by casting votes of returning officers, the cast in each case being against an immediate past member for the electorate, Hon. J. G. Coates said: —"I suppose there are recounts and so on still to come, at least there probably will be. I prefer to say nothing about the matter at the present stage. RETURNING OFFICERS' ACTION. A LIKELY THEORY. Discussing with a Times representative the very peculiar position which lias arisen in connection with ihe Westland and Lyttelton electorates Mr .1. A. Young, M*P. for Hamilton, advanced the very likely theory that ttie three or four absentee votes which were not accompanied by Ihe usual declarations, and which were therefore invalid in ordinary circumstances, were in favour of the candidate in whose favour the returning officer in each case exercised his casting vote. This Mr Young considers, probably accounts for the seemingly extraordinary result. RETURNING OFFICER'S VIEWS. VOTE FOR RETIRING MEMBER. An Auckland returning officer said that many years ago he had discussed this very problem with other returning officers. Without exceptions they had all stated that if the occasion arose they would give their casting vote in favour of ihe retiring member. In the opinion of this officer the re-' tiring member is not defeated until the returning officer has given his casting vote, and to his mind it was not for the returning officer to defeat the" retiring member. That, he said, was the view of most returning officers with whom he had come in contact.

AN EARLY PRECEDENT. On at least one occasion previously a member of Parliament has been returned by the casting vote of a returning officer. This occurred in Moluek/ in 1871. The candidates were Sir David Monro, who had been a Speaker of the House of Representatives for 10 years, and Mr. Charles Parker. The poll was taken on February 10, 1871, and both candidates received 103 votes. The returning officer gave his casting vote for the retiring member. Later, owing to the discovery of the fact that a vote had been polled for Sir D. Monro by a man who was not registered, he was unseated, and the seat went to Mr. Parker. There have been at least three instances of members of the New Zealand Parliament being elected by n majority of only one vote. In 1890 the late Mr. R. 11. J. Reeves was reelected for Inangahua by one vote, his opponent being Mr. John Drake. In 1899 the late Mr. John Bollard defeated the late Mr. MalccJm Niccol for Eden by the same narrow margin. At the same elections Hon. G. W. Russell defeated Hon. Wm. Rolleston for Riccarton, also by one vote.

Although Messrs Lyons and Seddon have been declared elected, this result may not prove to be final. It may be taken as certain that the defeated candidates, Messrs McCombs and O'Brien, will apply for a recount. Such application, acording to tho Legislature Amendment Act, 1008, must be made within three days of the declaration of the poll, and be acompanied by a deposit of £2O. The recount takes place before the magistrate to whom application is made, and if he finds that tho previous declaration was incorrect be shall order an amended declaration to be made. An election may also be upset if an election petition is presented and duly sustained. Such a petition can be pre- | sented within 28 days after Ihe declaration of the poll, and is addressed to the Chief Justice. Security or £2OO must be lodged with the petition, which is heard before two Judges of the Supreme Court as named by the Chief Justice. Neither in Lyttelton nor in Westland did the returning officer lake the public into his confidence as to the rea- ! sons which impelled hiin to give his | casting vole for the candidate, of his i choice. {.Continued at. foot of next column.)

At, Lyttelton the returning officer bad, of course, cast his vote before making tho. announcement of the result. After stating the result of the poll he said the <eount of votes had left, the two candidates equal, and that he had given his casting vote for Mr Lyons.