SELECT COMMITTEE ON FICTITIOUS VOTES, IRELAND. sJ7' uerLt'in'. L6" 6" 1'''' ^' 1 Claim ^ Pti ™ in like manner; persons in that way, wuhout ascertaining their absolute poverty. 4085. You were understood to say that if A. B. were imn from the payment of local taxes, that' would not have be ™ a Reason with you to 24T Mr. D. Meagher. from the exempt C. manner; we have allowed improperly exempted 5 March 1838. u not nave been hut the last question has drawn to my neigh- c? that w attention inJ^^*?' 1 State, d, th, f ' — — « « quesnon nas drawn bourand Tr I1-' T ( TK| all° W " pa^' from comparison with his Dour and I now explain what I mean by comparison. vof did Ul yT ^ rj n° d° Ubt tha/ th6re Were a number of i^ tances in which IZru i IT r the pa; ment 0f taxes Persons in the occupation of houses which ought properly, according to the Act of Parliament, to be rated and who were in circumstances to enable them to pay the taxes ?— Indeed I believe there were instances of that kind. 4687. When you say you believe there were instances, do you mean to sav YOU are no't sure ?— I am not sure. J : 4688. Then you are not prepared to say that any person was exempt upon bat occasion who occupied premises that were a proper subject for ratine and . o was 111 circumstances to pay rates ?— I am not in a situation to answer pre- cisely that; but I believe, generally speaking, we looked to the circumstances of the party ; there may be exceptions where they were excused by comparison, but I do not think there are many. 4689. Having the lists before you, will you refer to the list and point out any person who, being in possession of premises which, in your judgment, ought to be rated, and being in circumstances to pay the rate, has been exempted ?— There is a person of the name of A. Norwood, Bachelor's Quay ; I think his house, being on Bachelor's Quay, strictly speaking, ought not to be exempted. 4690. In your judgment, that tenement is one that ought to have been rated?— I think so. 4691. To what value ?—£. 1 2. 4G92. Was Mr. Norwood in circumstances enabling him to pay the rate?— I have since learned that he is; he keeps, I believe, a watchmaker's shop there. 4693. Did not you at the time inquire into his circumstances?— It must have been represented to us at the lime that the man was not in circumstances, but pro- bably we did it by a comparison with his next- door neighbour; but I now know that he is a man that I think could pay it. 4694. Have you ascertained that he is a man that could pay the rate ?— I think he is ; I know the man, and I know the house. 4695. Mr. Lefroy.] Your now being of opinion that he should be charged to the rate, arises from circumstances subsequent to the inquiry?— Yes. 4696. Chairman.] Then your opinion as to his not being properly exempted has been formed subsequently to the period of your serving upon the grand jury? — Yes. 4697. Mr. Lefroy.'] Can you point out a single one on that list whom, at the time, you considered to be in circumstances to be taxed, and yet you exempted him, from a comparison with his neighbour?— Not at that time; but I have subse- quently learnt that there are some, and had I to do it again, I would not allow them. 4698. Mr. Serjeant Jackson.] You were asked to point out an instance 111 the list, in which a party occupying a tenement which at the time ought to have been rated and being in circumstances to pay, was exempted as not capable ot paying . — The parties that claimed here, claimed upon the score of setting to poor lodgers, and upon that score we allowed them, and not upon the ground of poverty. 4600. Can you point out in the list an instance of one person who in your judgment, at the time occupied a house that ought to have been rated the party being also, in your judgment, at the time in circumstances which enabled him o pay The rate ?— I think parties were in circumstances to pay the rate, but we allowed them upon the score of having set to poor lodgers. 4700. Can you point out an instance in the list ot a party exempted from the payment K^ eVwho occupied premises which ought to have ^ n rated, and was in circumstances that enabled him to pay?- Here is Mis. Drraan, she occupied premises at 25 /. a year; she was able to pay- lodgers, we exempted her upon that account. _ distinct Has it not been understood that the setting to 0001 ^ 8 u _ tlimr but being set to poor house and a 16/. house, and they nd. 4701. . head of exemption ?— Yes ; here is a 32/. —- having set their lodgings to poor lodgers, we exempted them upon that grou ^ 0.46. EE2