SELECT COMMITTEE ON FICTITIOUS VOTES, IRELAND. sJ7' 24T competent judgment ?— And for their knowled- e of the dhtri*- „ v u . were appointed ge 01 tne district to which they attend some meetings of the committee upon some subsequent occasion ed not attend so punctually there; but Mr. Alleyn Charles M'Carthy attended in the place that I was appointed to, No. 1, Mr. Moody's booth, when I was not 6062 Did the gentlemen give satisfaction who were appointed to register — Certainly not. We objected to a great number of their decisions; fattended in one booth myself, Mr. Gahan's, and I had an argument of two or three hours against the registry of a portrait- painter, as a householder, out of a drawing room and bed- chamber. 6063. Chairman.'] What is the name of the person?— I think it was O'Keefe of Cook- street. 6064. Was he admitted ?— He was ; and I recollect Mr. Gahan introducing both the French and Italian language as evidence of his decision, callin°- the word " studio" as a shop. 606.5. Did Mr. Gahan say that the word " studio" meant a shop ?— So I under- stood. 6066. What was the French he introduced ?— I forget the French word, as I do not speak French. 6067. Mr. Serjeant Jackson.] The legal argument was, that the claimant claiming to register in right of a shop, it was satisfactorily made out that he had a shop, because he had a studio as a painter ?— That he painted pictures and sold them, as he said, in liis drawing- room. 6068. Mr. Lefroy.] According to the provisions of the Reform Act, there was no remedy against those objectionable decisions, either the one you formerly alluded to, or this latter one ?— No ; there was no appeal against the admission upon the register of a voter ; but there was an appeal on behalf of the voter, if he was rejected. 6069. ( To Mr. Colburn.) Do you find him upon the register ?— I find " John O'Keefe, portrait- painter, Cook- street, city of Cork; workshop, Cook- street; householder, 10/.; registered 13th November 1832." 6070. Mr. Serjeant Jackson, to Mr. Barber.] You mention that as an instance of the unsatisfactory nature of many of the decisions ?— I do ; I argued that the man had not the sole use of the hall- door, and the answer to me was, that there was a cross- door inside the hall- door, which was shut; and yet he had not the whole upper part of the house at all, for the under part was the offices of an attorney. The kitchen, at the rear of those offices, belonged to the owner of the house, and so did the garret part of the house. 6071. So that this portrait- painter neither had the exclusive use of the hall- door nor of the cross- door, which was relied upon as a substitute for the hall- door ?— Exactly so; I knew the premises well myself, for I had been 111 the habit of visiting a person who lodged there before him, and I argued it beiore Mr. Gahan upon that account. 6072 And it appeared that the whole which lie had m his own occupation was the drawing- room and bed- chamber ?- Yes, and a little closet, all upon a floor. 6073 Do you know whether others were admitted 111 a similar way, with small portions of a house ?- I do not recollect any others of that particular class at that time. curious ent upon a question whether a lease for 999 years was not a freehold ?- I heard of it but I was not presen at the ai^ ment; it was brought down to us that Mr. Gahan had decided that a coming forward to register in the character ° f 6076 " Se fo^ d armed with the evidence of their former registry ? - They came forward grounded upon not kn0w whether 6077. Did they produce a certificate of iegisti} . 1 uo there were any instances of any producing a certificate, case ® 0.4C. " N N 2