Appendix IV.

Petition of Bruce Electors to Parliament to Validate the Licensing Poll.

Unto the Honourable the Members of the House of Representatives of New Zealand in Parliament assembled.

The petition of the undersigned electors of Bruce humbly sheweth:—

1.	That a Licensing Poll, in terms of "The Alcoholic Liquors Sale Control Act, 1895," was taken in the electorate of Bruce on the same day as the General Election, 25th November, 1902.
2.	That the said poll was conducted by the returning officer and electors in the manner set forth in the said Act for taking the Licensing Poll.
3.	That the proposal, that no licenses be granted or renewed in the electorate, was declared by the returning officer carried by the required three-fifths majority of the electors.
4.	That on a recount of the votes by the Stipendiary Magistrate, in terms of the law, the numbers for the various proposals were declared as follows:—Voters, 3901; Continuance, 1525; Reduction, 2157; No-license, 2372; showing a majority of 31 over the required three-fifths of the electors, and an actual majority of 847 of' the electors for No-license as against Continuance.
5.	That a petition by a defeated minority of the electors to declare the election void on the ground of alleged irregularities permitted in the conduct of it, was lodged in the Court of the Stipendiary Magistrate and tried by him.
6.	That the said magistrate "reluctantly" declared the election null and void on the ground that "strict time" was not kept at certain booths, and that certain irregularities tending, in the magistrate's opinion, to defeat the fairness of the election were permitted at others.
7.	That the magistrate found that, all the irregularities not-withstanding, the ultimate result of the election was not affected thereby; his words being: "As the majority was over 30 I do not think the proved cases affected the result."
8.	That the decision of the magistrate in voiding the election for irregularities that did not affect the result, was based on the principle that the Licensing Poll should have been conducted as a "Road Board poll," in terms of "The Regulation of Local Elections Act, 1876."
9.	That "The Alcoholic Liquors Sale Control Act, 1895," in terms of which the poll was held, declares, section 7 (l.a): "The returning officer of the electoral district shall, upon the day appointed, proceed to take the Licensing Poll in the manner provided by the Electoral Act for taking the electoral poll."
10.	That section 7 (o) of the same act says: "If the result of any licensing poll is disputed, any 50 electors may require an inquiry page 32 to be held in manner provided by section 48 and the subsequent sections of "The Regulation of Local Elections Act, 1876, and the matter in dispute shall be determined in the same manner, mutatis mutandis, as if the said poll were an electoral poll."
11.	That, the above sections notwithstanding, the magistrate decided the matter in dispute as if the said Licensing Poll were a "Road Board poll" taken in terms of "The Regulation of Local Elections Act, 1876."
12.	That the said "Regulation of Local Elections Act. 1876," was not sent by the authorities to the returning officer to guide him in the conduct of the Licensing Poll.
13.	That the returning officer did not send a single copy of "The Regulation of Local Elections Act, 1876," to any booth in the electorate to guide the deputy-returning officers or the electors in the conduct of the election.
14.	That in consequence of the said decision of the magistrate, based on principles governing the conduct of a road board poll in the Regulation of Local Elections Act, the whole electors of Bruce have been deprived of their lawful power at the poll, and their unmistakably expressed will declared null and void.
15.	That in terms of section 57 of the Regulation of Local Elections Act, there is no appeal from the decision of the magistrate.
16.	That the law does not provide for a fresh poll of the electors under the same conditions as those under which the election which was declared void was held.
17.	That a fresh election is not required either in law or equity to determine the will of the electors, as, in the opinion of the magistrate, the result of the election would not have been other than it is.
18.	That a fresh election, which could not be held under the same conditions as those under which the election which was declared void was held, and simultaneously with a parliamentary election, would not be just to the electors of Bruce, and would, in the circumstances set forth, be without precedent in the conduct of elections on national questions.

Now, therefore, the undersigned electors of Bruce humbly pray that your Honourable House, in view of the premises above set forth, will be pleased to validate the said Licensing Poll.

And your petitioners will every pray.