SELECT COMMITTEE ON FICTITIOUS VOTES, IRELAND. 111 c not be produced again ?— I do not consider that they gave false testimony, Mr. Patrick Flood because here I bring documents to prove that they did not. • 9186. You have read the proceedings of the last Committee?— I have not 11 May by any means read them all through. 9187. Did you happen to read that part in which Sir Cam Hobhouse and other Members of the Committee desired that a particular witness should not be produced again in consequence of the false testimony which he appeared to the Committee to have given ?— I did not; I understood that the witnesses said that they would not go in, that they saw it to be of no use. 9188. But you did not hear of any witness that the Committee desired might not be produced again ?— There was Mr. Davis, that there was something about. 9189. What was that something?— About the value of a house. 9190. Was not it to the effect that the Committee desired that he might not be produced again ?— It was not, but that he was not a judge of houses. 9191. And it was simply on account of his want of judgment, not his want of truth ?— I have not heard of any such thing. 9192. You have not heard that Mr. Davis's testimony was impeached for want of veracity ?— Certainly not. 9193. Nor any other witness that was produced before that Committee?— No. 9194. Mr. O'Connell.] Who is Mr. Davis?— He is a gentleman that holds a good deal of property in the off part of the county ; he has a good deal of land let to tenants. 9195. Mr. Lefroy.] With respect to whose farm was Mr. Davis examined?— I could not tell. 9196. Do you know as to whose farm Daly was examined ?— I know Mr. Davis was examined as to a good many farms; he was examined as to a man of the name of Cullen, and he was examined as to a man of the name of Tuite ; I believe Daly is the man that is alluded to; Daly was examined, and Brock was examined on the same farm, and Brock swore that the man had not out- houses. 9197. Did you hear that, upon the result of Daly's own examination, the Committee desired that he might not be produced again ?— No. 9198. Mr. Curry.] Will you name the next upon your list whose farm you valued?— John Reilly, of Trumroe, on the same townland. 9199. When was he registered?— In 1832. 9200. When was he struck off?— In 1S37- 9201. Did you view and value his farm ? — I did. 9202. In what year?— In 1837- 9203. Will you state the particulars of the valuation ?— Sixteen acres, a rood, and 35 perches. 9204. Was it the same rent as the others?— No ; it is at a lower rent, 30 5. an acre. 9205. What does that come to ?— About 25 /. 9206. Were there any houses upon that farm?— Yes, the same. 9207. Were they in good condition ?— In very good condition. 9208. What stock had he upon it in 1837, when you saw it?— He had three cows and a horse, two two- year old heifers, and three pigs. 9209. How many acres of oats had he that year?— Six acres of oats. 9210. How many potatoes ?— Two acres of potatoes. 9211. Any meadow land ?— No; there is not much meadow ground upon this land. 9212. How is the rest of his farm occupied ?— Under grass. 9213. In your judgment, would a solvent tenant have given John Reilly 10 /. a year over and above the rent he paid for his farm ?— He would. 9214. According to your judgment, what was the beneficial value of that man's farm to him by the year?— It cannot be less than 40/. and upwards. 9215. Had he a lease ?— Yes, the same as the others, dated in 1828. 9216. Mr. Lefroy.] You have arrived at the estimate of the beneficial interest, in respect to this farm, by the same process by which you arrived at it in the others?—! made my calculation much the same, of course. 9217. Is your opinion equally strong in this case, that the farm would not be long in the market at any time ; if the man were willing to let it at an increased 643. Q 3 rent