May 12, 1908 (10th Parliament, 4th Session)



I might also point out, speaking of irregularities, a case that occurred in tiie election of Morris where the result was changed by the fact that three men were allowed to be put on the list illegally. i am not here to say whether these men were entitled to vote, but the same Mr. BURROWS.
consideration should he given to one side as to the other. If the registration clerk is going to receive applications in an illegal manner from the government side, he should if he wants to be fair, receive them from the other side. I mention this case to point out that, in the administration of this Act, a good many irregularities have occurred, and it is to these irregularities that we object. I may add a word in explanation of what my hon. friend from Marquette (Mr. W. J. Roche) said the other night t he case was this : A certain gentleman wrote a private letter to the registration clerk asking that three names he placed on the list. The registration clerk put these names on the list, as there was no application in the legal form justified by the Act. No application was made to strike the names off the list, and according to the Manitoba Election Act the judge has no power to strike off a name unless the parties have been notified to appear. When the revision was held, the gentleman acting for the Libera] party asked to see the interrogatories and found that there were no interrogatories, but that the cases were irregular. He pointed this out to the judge, but the judge said that although the names were on Irregularly he wquld not strike them off because proper notice had not been given to the parties. As a result these three names were left on the list, though they should not have been there. This is a case with which I am quite fami-iar. Probably, X should not have mentioned it, had not the hon. member for Marquette mentioned it. In that election, the attorney general was elected by two votes, and these three men improperly put on the list were supposed to be the means of electing him. There was a recount resulting in a tie and the attorney general was declared elected by the casting vote of the returning officer. Another case may be cited which Mr. J. A. Campbell, the local member representing the county of Dauphin, brought iff up in the legislature. He was accused of making a charge against the judge who was tiie revising officer. He said he made no charge. He made a motion for a return of the papers in the case, but tiie government refused the motion and it was voted down. The government said they had not the original papers and would not bring them down. The motion was voted down on a straight party vote of 18 to 12.

Topic:   C. J. MICKLE.
Full View