23 8 m i n u t e s o f e v i d e n c e t a k e n b e f o r e t I Ie interred out of the house, his landlord, Sullivan, was admitted " had not served seven ye rs, and 5U « hWilliam Childs, the masterJ- No; but I was with his landlord and receiver of rents. 4840 Did YOU ever make any intimation to the corporation that this young man, James Morgan, had not served his apprenticeship properly r- I did. 4850. " When ?— At the same time as the others, to Mr. Besnard. 4851. That is, in January last?— Yes. . , 485" And no other person, to vour knowledge, ever made such a communica- tion to the corporation before ?— Not that I am aware of. 18 V ( To Mr. Besnard.) Will you inform the Committee whether or not the established course Mas adopted in the case of this James Morgan?— I have not the least recollection of it at all. . . , , . , . . „ 4854. Chairman^] Have vou any entries in your book respecting him f— 1 es. 485 5'. ( To Mr. Colburn.) J) oes he appear upon the roll?— He does. ( Mr. Bes- jiard.) I have the entry of James Morgan having served William Childs, nailer, and beins admitted, as of right, on the 5th of July 1836. 4856/ Have you any doubt that in that young man's case the usual proceeding- was adopted ?— I have none whatever. 4857. You would not put the case before the council unless the proper docu- . nients were presented to you ?— It always comes by petition. 4858. And the fact of serving the apprenticeship is authenticated ?— It is. 4859. Will you state distinctly what the course of proceeding is when a person claims to be admitted a freeman in right of servitude?— He presents a petition, stating the date of his indentures, and his having served his apprenticeship, and at the foot of it his affidavit, verifying the facts mentioned in the petition. 4860. That is presented to the council?— That is presented to the council' 4861. Docs the council upon that proceed to examine into the matter ?— They do. 4862. And they satisfy themselves upon the allegation upon which the right is founded before they admit the party ?— They do. 4863. Have you any reason to doubt that the same proceeding was adopted with regard to James Morgan that is always adopted with regard to apprentices ?— I have 110 reason to doubt that everything was done then which is done usually. 4864. Is it your business to be present upon those occasions ?— Yes, I am usually there, audit is my business to be there, unless illness or accident prevents me. 4805. Supposing circumstances came to the knowledge of the council, such as have been described by Mr. Meagher, would any person connected with the cor- poration deem it his duty to oppose the admission of an individual so circum- stanced ?— If there is the slightest question it is brought before the common council. 4866. Mr. Serjeant Jackson. J Have you any doubts, that if the facts stated by Mr. Meagher were made to appear to the council, his claim would be rejected?— I do not know. With respect to a person who had neariv served out his apprentice- ship, and his master had died, there are two instances here, in which they were admitted, after consideration of the subject. 4867. Did they require in those cases that it should appear that the apprentice had continued to serve in the establishment of some of the family, after the de- cease of the master?— Certainly. 4868. Then they do require to be satisfied that there has been a seven years servitude, either to the individual to whom the party is bound, or to his represen- tatives ?— Certainly. 4869. If the contrary of that state of facts appears, namely, that the appren- tice ceased to serve upon the death of his master, who died before the seven years were expired, the council would not admit him ?— Undoubtedly they would refuse him. J J 4870. They would do so irrespective of any party consideration whatever?— I am convinced they would. 4871. Have the corporation of Cork shown themselves to be actuated by party views m the admission of freemen, by availing themselves of the power of making honorary freemen, who would, as honorary freemen, not be entitled to register, but whose sons would be ent. tled to register, and claim as of right ?— No, They have lltL h^ C0? S1! er. 11 7£ uid be a violation of the intentions of the Legislature ; thevut 1 ACt d, fferS fr° m the E" Slish 0ne in Permitting it to be done, but mey nave not done so. 4872. Are