ON THE LOCAL TAXATION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN. 43 liistime?— I think it should occupy the entire of his time; but I did not assert that the increase was from 150 to 1,000 ; nor has the advance of his salary from 300/. to 400/. any reference to that increase. You have stated that he is the curate of St. Michan's parish ?— He is. Are you aware that it is in that capacity that he is by Act of Parliament ap- pointed to this situation ?— I am aware of it. Are you aware that he has no connection, either directly or indirectly, with any members of the corporation, and that, till he became inspector of the gaol, he was totally unconnected with them ; are you aware of any connection ever having sub- sisted between them ?— I am not aware that, previous to his holding the appoint- ment, he had any connection with them. Was it competent to them, by law, if the grand jury had been so inclined, to appoint any other person than the curate of that parish r— He has the preference ; I never heard that they were compelled to elect him ; but I have always understood that he was entitled to a preference. In point of fact, from your own observation, have you any reason to suppose that he neglects his duties as inspector of prisons ?— I have no reason to know that he neglects the inspection of the prisons. On the contrary, do not you really believe that his conduct as inspector is exemplary ?— I really could not pretend to express an opinion on the subject. Have you been in the habit of visiting the different gaols ?— Occasionally. In the course of your own observation, did it ever occur to you to see any thing which would lead you to suppose that he neglects his duty ?— No, not from my observation. That being the case, dees it not justify you in believing that he performs his duty ?— I have no reason to doubt that the duty is not performed ; but, at the same time, I think it impossible that he could perform it according to the letter of the Act, or so as to entitle him to a salary of 400/. a year. Then your only reason for having any doubt upon the subject, arises from the extent of the attention the Act of Parliament requires ?— My reason for doubting it arises, in the hrst place, from the great extent of the population of the parish of which he is curate, and which, I should think, demands his attention as the primary part of his duty. Do you look upon it, that a sum of 4001, a year is an exorbitant salary for a person necessarily receving a college education, and devoting the whole of his time, as you say it requires, to the duties of inspector of prisons ?— I think there are many persons equally competent who would be glad to undertake the office, and would discharge it equally, if not more efficiently, for his original salary of 3001. or even 200/. a year I have not said that he devotes the whole of his time to it; I know that he ought not to do so. The question is, whether a salary of 4001, a year for a clergyman of literary education, and who has taken a degree at college, is an exorbitant salary ?— I think a salary of 3001, a year would be sufficient for a gentleman possessing all those qualifications ; and I think also, that those qualifications are wholly unnecessary in the inspector of a gaol. The Act of Parliament, however, gives a preference to the curate of the parish ?— I am aware of that circumstance; and it is one of those circumstances which, I con- ceive, calls most decided for remedy. Then the remedy must be in the Act of Parliament, and not in the grand jury ?— In both ; and therefore we are first seeking a remedy from Parliament. Do you conceive that the Act of Parliament remaining as it is, the increase of salary to the inspector of prisons has, or has not, been warranted by the necessity of the case?— I think it is quite unwarranted by the necessity of the case. Do you know any gentleman who has been brought up at college, and is a curate, who lives upon less than that?— I know of many who have not too/, a year, possessed of equal or superior qualifications. The next increase of salary which you mention, was that of the physician?— Yes. His salary has been increased to 4001, a year ?— It has. For that salary the physician is bound to attend each of those five prisons twice a week ?— He is. Those prisons are, some of them, inconveniently situated at a distance from each other ?— One of them is at a considerable distance from the others. Must he not prescribe for, and satisfy himself as to the state of all the sick, in ^ tho e five prisons?— It is his duty to do so. 549- Do ' 0 Mi- John M'Mullen ^ ^ ( 1 May.)