188 MlNXJTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE Mr. Bryan Clogher. - 10067. Wil1 you 011 and state wliat Sum y0U aH° W mailUal labour in each — case? I allow 20 men for labouring an acre of potatoes. 16 May 1838. loo68 jIow many ( jays ?_ One day, at 1 5. a day. 10069. That is 24< y'' what is there besides ?— Then I allow another pound for digging the potatoes. 10070. That is 245.?— Yes. . 10071. Then you allow nothing to the man for his labour when he takes them to market?— No ; because he may get the value of his potatoes in the house, without bringing them to market; it is very seldom that they bring potatoes to market; they feed pigs, and so on. 10072. Now as to the oats, in the same manner?— For the ploughing and sow- ing, 15 s. an acre, and for the seed 155. 10073. That is simply for the seed itself, and then you do not allow anything for manual labour there?—! would get the man that holds the plough, to plough, to harrow, and to shake the seed, for 15 s. 10074. Do you mean to say that that is the manual labour, or is it for the hire of the plough?— It is all included in that; there is nothing but the two men that attend the plough. 10075. In the cultivation of this farm how many days' labour do you conceive one man would have to expend ?— I did not get into that calculation; it would be easy to ascertain it from this. 10076. Supposing one man alone was employed upon that farm, how many days'labour would it require him to cultivate it for the whole year?— I will make the calculation and bring it the next day. 10077. Are you aware that Brady claimed to be registered in 1832, and was then rejected ?— I do not know it, unless what I have seen there, because I did not know anything about the county in 1832. 10078. Looking at the Evidence given last spring before the Election Com- mittee, did not you see that fact stated ?— I did not take much notice of it. 10079. Mr. Curry.'] Have not all the men you have last mentioned, namely, Farrell, Cunningham, Reynolds, and Brady, been since re- registered for the county?'— I believe Brady was re- registered, and Cunningham and Reynolds. 10080. Were you at the registry when they were registered ?— I was at the registry when Cunningham and Farrell were registered. 10081. Were you examined as a witness upon the subject of the value of their farms ?— I was 0n Farrell's. 10082. Were there any witnesses examined on the other side to show that he had not value ?— No, there were not; they called for witnesses, and they would not produce any ; I was told that they were in court, but did not come forward. 10083. Farrell and Cunningham were re- registered, as well as Reynolds and Brady ?— Yes. 10084. Chairman.'] Farrell was struck off by the Committee, and afterwards re- registered ?— Yes. _ 10085. Was any question put, at the time of his re- registry, as to the value of his house ?— I do not recollect. i 0086. Mr. Curry.] Have you the particulars of Michael Gellassy's farm with you to- day ?— I have. 10087. What number of acres were there in his farm ?— 8 acres, 3 roods, and 20 perches. 10088. What did you value it at by the acre ?— I valued four acres of oats, 2/. I valued the acre of meadow, 3/.; three acres and three roods of tillage and pasture, 1 /. 105. an acre. 10089. What is the amount of the whole?—£. 17. 1 2 s. 1 d, 10090. I) o you know what rent he pays ?— No. ' 10091. What was the quality of his land, one acre with another Indeed it was a nice quality; there was part of it very good ; there was part of it detached from the house, a holding that was of very good quality. 10092. What kind of houses were upon it ?—' The house is a comfortable house, not lar^ e. 10093. Have you measured the house ?— I have not it here; I find here 201 tor building the house. 10094. Was the house built of stone?— Yes, I believe it was 10095. Was it thatched ?— Thatched. 10006. Were