CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · History & Society

1860 Omata by-election

New Zealand by-election

Layered newspapers, civic records and oral-history reels arranged as chronological evidence
History and societyInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionJun 7, 2026
Entity authorityQ60580350 ↗
Source-derived summary

The 1860 Omata by-election was a by-election held on 16 April in the Omata electorate in Taranaki during the 2nd New Zealand Parliament.

The by-election was caused by the resignation of the incumbent, Alfred William East.

He was replaced by James Crowe Richmond.

Richmond was the only nomination, so was declared elected unopposed.

Editorial summary

Begin with the source’s own compact description: “1860 Omata by-election” is new Zealand by-election. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Omata, by-election and Zealand, not as a finished interpretation.

Editorial reviewA useful synthesis for locating the documentary relationships between formal authority, participants and affected communities. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—1860—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. For this dossier, Omata, by-election and Zealand is the immediate research focus.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The phrase “new Zealand by-election” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.

Evidence profile

Contemporary correspondence, administrative files and participant testimony can test how later narratives organized the event or institution. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jun 7, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q60580350. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1860.

Critical limits

Later summaries often reconcile disputed chronology or motive more neatly than the contemporary record permits. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Compare institutional narratives with records created by participants and affected communities. Dates and formal titles are useful anchors, but not substitutes for context.

Best used for
  • Event chronology
  • Institutional context
  • Locating named record creators
Verify next

Contemporary correspondence, government or organizational records, oral histories and cited historical scholarship.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “1860 Omata by-election”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow 1860 Omata by-election primary sources, 1860 Omata by-election archive and Omata research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “1860 Omata by-election”?
  2. What chronology connects this entry to wider political or social change?
  3. Who created the surviving record, and for what administrative purpose?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “1860 Omata by-election” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.