I.—B

14

F.—Stanmore Election. The Honorable the Speaker of the House of Eepresentatives. In the matter of " The Election Petitions Act, 1880," and in the matter of the Petition of William Patten Cowlishaw, of the city of Christchurch, solicitor, in respect of an Election for the Electoral District of Stanmore, holden on the 9th day of December, 1881, a copy of which said Petition is hereunto annexed. We, the undersigned, two of the Judges of the Supreme Court, duly appointed to try the abovementioned petition, having tried the same in accordance with the provisions of the said Act, do hereby respectfully certify our determination that Walter Hippolite Pilliet was not duly elected and returned as member for the said Electoral District of Stanmore, and that the said election was void ; and we do further respectfully report as follows, that is to say — 1. That an illegal practice was proved to have been committed by and with the knowledge and consent of Walter Hippolite Pilliet, a candidate at the said election, in that he, the said Walter Hippolite Pilliet, for the purpose of promoting and procuring the election of the said Walter Hippolite Pilliet, at the said election, engaged and employed for promise of payment one John Scott, of Stanmore Boad, law clerk, an elector of the said district, as clerk and committee-man. 2. That no corrupt practice has been proved to have been committed at the said election by or with the knowledge and consent of any candidate at the said election. 3. That the said John Scott was proved at the trial to have been guilty of an illegal practice in that he, the said John Scott, being an elector of the said district, was the person so engaged and employed as above mentioned by the said Walter Hippolite Pilliet. 4. That no other person was proved to have been guilty of any illegal practice, nor has any person been proved to have been guilty of any corrupt practice. 5. That there is no reason to believe that either corrupt or illegal practices prevailed extensively at the said election. Witness our hands this 20th day of February, a.d., 1882. Alexander J. Johnston, Joshua Strange Williams.

G.—Wanganui Election. To the Honorable the Speaker of the House of Eepresentatives, New Zealand. In the matter of " The Election Petitions Act, 1880," and the Petition of Willis and others against the return of William Hogg Watt for the Electoral District of Wanganui. We, the Judges appointed to try the election petition of Archibald Duddington Willis, John Ballance, and Stuart Hercus Manson, against the return of William Hogg Watt, as member for the Electoral District of Wanganui, do hereby certify in accordance with the provisions of " The Elections Petitions Act, 1880," that the said William Hogg Watt was duly elected member of the House of Eepresentatives for the said Electoral District of Wanganui; and we do also hereby report that no corrupt practice has been proved to have been committed by or with the knowledge or consent of any candidate at the said election, and that there is no reason to believe that corrupt practices have extensively prevailed at the said election. Given under our hands this ninth day of March, one thousand eight hundred and eighty-two. James Prendergast, Thomas B. Gillies.

COEEESPONDENCE. No. 1. The Clerk of the Committee to Messrs. Harper & Co. Gentlemen, — House of Eepresentatives, Wellington, 24th July, 1882. I have the honor by direction of the Chairman of the Select Committee appointed to report on certain cases tried before the Election Petitions Courts, to forward you herewith copy of a portion of the evidence of Mr. Bloxam, Eegistrar of Supreme Court, Christchurch, relative to Mr. Wason's costs if you desire to make any remarks thereon. The whole of Mr. Bloxam's evidence will be forwarded to you when printed. I have, &c, J. Fynes Clinton, Messrs. Harper & Co., Christchurch. Clerk Election Petitions Inquiry Committee.

No. 2. Similar letter to No. 1 sent to J. C. Wason, Esq.