353 M I N U T E S OF E V I D E N C E T A K E N B E F O R E T I IE John Julian. Esq. a solvent tenant,, and received the rent ?— I think, under those circumstances, a man could not properly swear he had a freehold of the yearly value of 10/., 11 July 1838. over aiKj above all rents and charges, payable out of the same; and that he was in the actual occupation thereof. 14916. That is your construction of the statute ?— Yes, if I understand you right. 14917. I will mention to you a case: in the town of Kilrush, a man built two houses; he was subject to rent and tithes, amounting to 10/.; he let one of those houses at 10/. a year, but kept the other in his own possession, the value of each being equal: in that case the assistant barrister rejected him, but the judge put him upon the register ?— What was the value of the part in his own occupation ? 14918. Ten pounds. The lot which he took at 10/. a year he divided into two, and built houses of equal value upon each plot, and let one of the houses at 10/. a year, which was the amount of the rent charged out of the entirety? — If the part of which he was in possession was worth but 10/. a year, I should have said he had not a right to be registered; that would be my opinion, but I should bow to the opinion of the judge of assize. 14919. Though in that case it was ascertained, by the letting to a solvent tenant, first, that there was a sum of money to pay the rent and charges, and next, that the part in his own possession was worth 10/. a year, you would object to his being registered ?— I conceive he must have the value of 15/. a year in the part in his own occupation ; and I do not see how he can with safety swear the oath in the schedule of the 2d & 3d of Will. 4, unless he had an interest to that amount. 14920. In the case I speak of, you think if the first house was worth 15/., and the second 10 /., the man could register ?— If the portion of head rent pay- able upon the first house was 5 /., and it was worth 15 /. a year, then I think that man might be entitled to register. 14921. Though the second house worth 15/. a year was liable to be distrained for the whole 10/. ?— The head rent was the rent payable out of the portion of which he was in the occupation as well as the other, and therefore it is ques- tionable whether he could swear he had in that particular portion a freehold of the clear yearly value of 10/., over and above the charges payable out of it. 14922. Just now you thought that under the circumstances I stated, if the second house was worth 15 /. a year, by apportioning a moiety of the rent upon it, it would be a fair case for registry ?— Yes, I consider it adopting a liberal construction when the assistant barrister held he should have 20/. a year, sufficient to pay head rent, and 10/. a year profit besides. 14923. And giving him no credit for the 10/. he punctually received out of the other moiety of the lot?— The same answer is made by the assistant barristers; to get credit for the portion not in your own occupation, } ou must apply to get registered for 20/. 14924. Suppose in the case I spoke of to you about the lot upon which the two houses were built, the rent and charges amounted to 20/., and that two liouses of equal value had been built, one on each moiety of that lot, and that one of those houses, with a moiety of the land, had been let at 20 /. a year to a solvent tenant, and the other moiety in the possession of the applicant was of equal value, would not that be a fit case for a judge to decide that the applicant upon the other moiety could register as a 10/. freeholder ?— Then the portion of the head rent, payable out of the house in the occupation of the applicant, would be 10/. a year, and he would have a profit of 10/. a year over and above that; the principle I mentioned would apply to the last case put, though not to the first. i4925- In that case the applicant's house would be liable to 20/. a year rent to the head landlord ?— Yes. 14926. The rent and charges payable by him by reason of his occupancy would be 20/. a year, and therefore if you charged him with the entire of the rent and charges, he would have 110 profit at all ?— Yes, and that opinion is held by some assistant barristers. 14927- You go this length, that in such a case as I put, you would apportion the rent on behalf of the applicant, and charge him with 10/. though liable to 20/.?— Yes. 14928. And